|
|
Post by stevie on Apr 18, 2019 13:05:46 GMT
I think Martin that the basic guideline for DBA is:- Being inside a TZ restricts movement (obviously), But the far-edge of a TZ only restricts the front-edge of an enemy. It’s as if the front-edge of the TZ generator were being projected forwards, and has a sort of ghostly physical presence 1 BW away, directly to its front, that only interacts with an enemy element's front-edge. (And people complain about quantum physics being hard!  )That would be plain nonsense - you’re either in or you’re not, regardless of facing. P Ah Paulisper, I think you are forgetting the ‘third state’ of positioning:- If you are outside a TZ, then you are unrestricted. If you are inside a TZ, then you are restricted. And if you are touching a TZ, which is neither in nor out... ...the far-edge of a TZ only restricts the front-edge of an enemy touching it.  (At least in DBA 3.0...HoTT didn't include this little detail, so has a different ruling)Some Helpful Downloads can be found here: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Reference_sheets_and_epitomes
And here is the latest Jan 2019 FAQ: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/FAQ_2019_1st_Quarter
|
|
|
|
Post by paulisper on Apr 18, 2019 14:00:11 GMT
Nah, Stevie, that’s Bulshido... 😱
P
|
|
|
|
Post by lkmjbc on Apr 18, 2019 14:41:41 GMT
What does this mean then?
" An element or group which is at least partly within or whose front edge enters an enemy
TZ or touches its far edge can move only:"
These are rules as written.
Joe Collins
|
|
|
|
Post by paulisper on Apr 18, 2019 14:56:05 GMT
What does this mean then? " An element or group which is at least partly within or whose front edge enters an enemy TZ or touches its far edge can move only:" These are rules as written. Joe Collins The problem is the lack of clear definitions over ‘within’ and the clumsy sentence structure, with a disregard for proper use of commas 😱 |
|
|
|
Post by martin on Apr 18, 2019 14:58:20 GMT
What does this mean then? " An element or group which is at least partly within or whose front edge enters an enemy TZ or touches its far edge can move only:" These are rules as written. Joe Collins All depends on whether the ‘touches its far edge’ part refers to the 1) ‘element or group’ generically or 2) only to that element ‘whose front edge’ ....semantics, and tough to unravel.... |
|
|
|
Post by lkmjbc on Apr 18, 2019 16:31:33 GMT
Textual analysis and email analysis are not helpful.
I just reviewed the test copies...
The Oct. 31, 2013 copy had the "in" and touching the far edge text.
The April 11, 2014 copy had a weird... front edge only text. No mention of "in"... only if your front edge enters or touches.
We complained as this was very weird.
The rule only found its final text after the June 11, 2014 play test version.
No email discussion on this before hand. This looks to be an editorial change to make the rules easier to read?
If someone has a test draft from between the above dates... please let us know the text of the rule from that copy.
Joe Collins
|
|
|
|
Post by lkmjbc on Apr 18, 2019 16:43:49 GMT
How does DBMM handle this situation?
(Does a flanking element have two elements of a line in its Threat Zone?)
Joe Collins
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Apr 18, 2019 16:55:00 GMT
Very well, let us look at the situation from a different point of view. The rules, and the words used to describe a rule, exist for one sole purpose... ...to tell us how we can move our little metal soldiers in various situations. Take the following example:- ┌─────────┐
│ λ │
└─────────┘
┌────┐┌─────────┐┌─────────┐ │ ││ 1 ││ 2 │ │ ᴟ │└─────────┘└─────────┘ │ │ ⁞ └────┘ . . . . . . . . . . . ⁞Do we want Element-Y to still be affected by a TZ if it recoils a full 1 BW? I think most players would say yes. But do we also want Element-2 to be able to attack the flank of Element-Y? Yes or no? If your answer is no, then give a real-life reason of why it could not do so. If your answer is yes, then we need a rule written in such a way as to allow it. So this rule has to have two different effects, and cover both different situations. Having “within” meaning “at or closer than” has the same meaning as “touching”. That is the approach and wording used in HoTT 2.0. It allows the recoiling element to remain affected by the TZ, but prevents the flanking move. So Phil Barker added the “front-edge” requirement to the Threat Zone rule in DBA 3.0. Now it does cover both situations... ...the recoiling element will still be under the TZ influence, but the flanking element is unaffected. After all, it is the horse that pulls the cart, not the cart that pushes the horse. How our troops should move came first, and rules constructed to tell us how, not the other way round.  |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Apr 18, 2019 19:17:31 GMT
Here are all the early DBA 3.0 drafts that I can find lurking on my computer Joe:- Late February? 2012
Danger Zone (“♫ Fly me to the danger zone ♫”...I’m glad the name changed, or I’d never get “Top Gun” out of my head!)
“An element at the far edge of, in or entering an enemy DZ with no part of another element between can move only...”
3rd March 2012
Threat Zone (that’s better)
“An element at the far edge of, in or entering an enemy TZ with no part of another element between can move only...”
30th September 2013
Threat Zone (ah, the first X-Ray TZ)
“ An element or group in, entering or touching the far edge of an enemy TZ can move only...”
11th October 2013
Threat Zone
“An element or group in, entering or touching the far edge of an enemy TZ can move only...”
10th June 2014
Threat Zone
“An element or group which is at least partly within or whose front edge enters an enemy TZ or touches its far edge can move only...”
November 2014
Threat Zone (the present-day version)
“An element or group which is at least partly within or whose front edge enters an enemy TZ or touches its far edge can only...”And here is the DBMM adjudication (like all things in DBMM, it’s quite wordy):- 2010 DBMM 2.0
Threat Zone, page 32
“(A TZ) extends up to and including 80p straight forward of a visible enemy’s front edge, even if it passed through another element or elements.
Any move (or extra movement to line up) that will enter, or starts in, an enemy TZ must be completed once started. It must either:
* Line up front edge-to-front edge
* Line up opposite the TZ-ing element most directly to its front
* Line up as an overlap on an enemy that both it and friends in the same group contact
* If the only enemy whose TZ affects it are in its rear, turn 180°
* Move straight forward either a) forwards not into contact, b) into contact, or c) towards the enemy exerting the TZ
* Follow or move into rear support behind friends at least partly directly in front
* Unless in close combat; move only straight back without contacting an enemy edge or corner
You can choose to ignore an enemy land element’s TZ if:
* It is Hordes (I), Baggage or a routing element
* There is any part of a water feature or a friendly fortification or obstacle between * Your element is making an outcome move or otherwise fleeing or routing” There are also some Figures, 6a to 7b, showing examples of Threat Zones and their effects... ...but none shows a similar situation to that diagram of mine with the blue flank attack influencing a red line. But figure 6d on page 51 does show this:- Blade-X ↓ ↑ Chariot-A ...with the front of the Blade-X 80p (the TZ depth) from the front of Bow-B ↑ Bow-B ...and the accompanying dialogue says this:- Chariot-A is shown in front edge contact with
Blade-X. The TZ of Blade-X extends through
Chariot-A and includes the front edge of Bow-B.
Bow-B is now subject to the TZ rules. |
|
|
|
|
Post by Simon on Apr 18, 2019 20:19:14 GMT
Very well, let us look at the situation from a different point of view. The rules, and the words used to describe a rule, exist for one sole purpose... ...to tell us how we can move our little metal soldiers in various situations. Take the following example:- ┌─────────┐
│ λ │
└─────────┘
┌────┐┌─────────┐┌─────────┐ │ ││ 1 ││ 2 │ │ ᴟ │└─────────┘└─────────┘ │ │ ⁞ └────┘ . . . . . . . . . . . ⁞Do we want Element-Y to still be affected by a TZ if it recoils a full 1 BW? I think most players would say yes. But do we also want Element-2 to be able to attack the flank of Element-Y? Yes or no? If your answer is no, then give a real-life reason of why it could not do so. If your answer is yes, then we need a rule written in such a way as to allow it. So this rule has to have two different effects, and cover both different situations. Having “within” meaning “at or closer than” has the same meaning as “touching”. That is the approach and wording used in HoTT 2.0. It allows the recoiling element to remain affected by the TZ, but prevents the flanking move. So Phil Barker added the “front-edge” requirement to the Threat Zone rule in DBA 3.0. Now it does cover both situations... ...the recoiling element will still be under the TZ influence, but the flanking element is unaffected. After all, it is the horse that pulls the cart, not the cart that pushes the horse. How our troops should move came first, and rules constructed to tell us how, not the other way round. I don't know if this is relevant but in HOTT 2.1, an intervening element stops an element being in a TZ. Therefore, in the example Element 2 is not TZ'd coz Element 1 is between it and the enemy element flanking 1. I think!! I don't know about HoTT 2.0. Simon |
|
|
|
Post by martin on Apr 18, 2019 21:33:54 GMT
Very well, let us look at the situation from a different point of view. The rules, and the words used to describe a rule, exist for one sole purpose... ...to tell us how we can move our little metal soldiers in various situations. Take the following example:- ┌─────────┐
│ λ │
└─────────┘
┌────┐┌─────────┐┌─────────┐ │ ││ 1 ││ 2 │ │ ᴟ │└─────────┘└─────────┘ │ │ ⁞ └────┘ . . . . . . . . . . . ⁞Do we want Element-Y to still be affected by a TZ if it recoils a full 1 BW? I think most players would say yes. But do we also want Element-2 to be able to attack the flank of Element-Y? Yes or no? If your answer is no, then give a real-life reason of why it could not do so. If your answer is yes, then we need a rule written in such a way as to allow it. So this rule has to have two different effects, and cover both different situations. Having “within” meaning “at or closer than” has the same meaning as “touching”. That is the approach and wording used in HoTT 2.0. It allows the recoiling element to remain affected by the TZ, but prevents the flanking move. So Phil Barker added the “front-edge” requirement to the Threat Zone rule in DBA 3.0. Now it does cover both situations... ...the recoiling element will still be under the TZ influence, but the flanking element is unaffected. After all, it is the horse that pulls the cart, not the cart that pushes the horse. How our troops should move came first, and rules constructed to tell us how, not the other way round. I don't know if this is relevant but in HOTT 2.1, an intervening element stops an element being in a TZ. Therefore, in the example Element 2 is not TZ'd coz Element 1 is between it and the enemy element flanking 1. I think!! I don't know about HoTT 2.0. Simon Hott 2 identical (it was basically a reprint, with Wb and Shooter move rates transposed and a few extra lists added). Threat Zone is blocked in Hott by intervening troops/obstacles, I think. |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Apr 18, 2019 22:26:56 GMT
Whoops!  Dead right Simon and Martin. Crossing an Enemy Element’s Front (HoTT 2.1, page 16)
“No element can make a tactical move within 1 element base width distance in front of an enemy element
or within 1 base width distance of an enemy stronghold except in any of the following circumstances:-
* If at least partially separated from the enemy element or stronghold by another element.”
I even had this written (correctly!) in my “Detailed Crib Sheets”. See fanaticus-dba.fandom.com/wiki/File:DETAILED_CRIB_SHEETS_for_HOTT_2.1.pdf (DBA 3.0...HoTT 2.1...DBMM 2.0...DBR 2.0...
...I’ve got so many different rules buzzing around in my head they are getting all mixed up! 
HoTT and DBR are the only ones that don’t have X-Ray Threat Zones...but DBA 3.0 and DBMM 2.0 do)And come to think of it, that’s probably why Phil Barker had to introduce that only a “front-edge” touching a TZ "far-edge" requirement. X-Ray Threat Zones introduced a new problem into DBA 3.0 that HoTT never had. Some Helpful Downloads can be found here: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Reference_sheets_and_epitomes
And here is the latest Jan 2019 FAQ: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/FAQ_2019_1st_Quarter
|
|
|
|
Post by medievalthomas on Apr 19, 2019 17:06:27 GMT
This is how we enforce the rule for at home play. It has given us no problems and everyone understands the text and concept.
"The area directly in front of the front edge of a Stand is called its Zone of Control (ZOC) and restricts the movement of enemy Stands. A Stand’s ZOC extends out 1BW from its front edge and includes the front edge of the ZOC but not the side edges. So a Stand touching the front edge of a ZOC counts as in the ZOC but not a Stand touching the side edge."
In short: front in, side out. Same rule should apply to Shooting Arc.
Have fun with the actual written rule.
|
|
|
|
Post by paddy649 on Apr 19, 2019 18:13:18 GMT
I have always seen TZ as being a bit of a misnomer. If a unit moves across a TZ - so what? Unless the unit whose TZ it is wants to react by charging or shooting etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by primuspilus on Apr 19, 2019 18:25:24 GMT
I have always seen TZ as being a bit of a misnomer. If a unit moves across a TZ - so what? Unless the unit whose TZ it is wants to react by charging or shooting etc. It is of course an abstraction, representing a great many things at our scale. So that can include that advanced companies are already rushing forward making contact, it can represent missil and/or artillery assets at below element level, as well as fear of chaos causing friendly elements that are X-rayed to be fearful of leaving that position in the line weakened, and hence be inclined to line up and stand ready in case the front element collapses. I mean, ya gotta think about keeping the women, children, wine and musical instruments safe for tonight's party! |
|
)
