|
|
Post by j on Oct 7, 2019 12:46:00 GMT
A double-wide column of 6 LH (2 wide, 3 deep) attempted to outflank the enemy but were charged in the flank by an element of LH & an element of Cv (The 3Kn General could not quite make it in)
The LH column had its left flank on the table edge.
^ ^
LH4 LH1 <LH
LH5 LH2* <Cv
LH6 LH3 <Kn*
Because of the difference between base widths & depths, the attacking LH hit LH1 with its front left hand corner in contact with the defender’s rear right corner (this is not a legal contact, right?) & the attacking Cv made legal contact with LH2* as well as being partially in contact with LH3. The General’s 3Kn couldn’t quite contact but would TZ LH3
This is where we were all at sea working out who faced who & who was displaced where.
At first it seemed easy. The legally contacted LH2* has to turn to face & conform to the Cv.
Does the 3rd rank LH3 have to be adjusted backwards to allow LH2* to conform?
Or is it supposed to turn with LH2* as in fig. 14b?
If the latter, what happens to LH5 & 6?
Or does LH5 turn to support LH2* with both LH3 & LH6 being displaced backwards?
I hope my confusing diagram & narrative can be made sense of & someone can point me to the relevant rules for this dilemma.
Regards,
j
|
|
|
|
Post by lkmjbc on Oct 7, 2019 13:44:53 GMT
A complicated scenario.
The center Lh turns to face. The trailing one moves in behind it...you will have to adjust the other part of the column (Lh 4,5,& 6). The leading light horse has enemy in flank contact...it is forced to turn to face as well.
Joe Collins
|
|
|
|
Post by j on Oct 7, 2019 16:48:06 GMT
A complicated scenario. The center Lh turns to face. The trailing one moves in behind it...you will have to adjust the other part of the column (Lh 4,5,& 6). The leading light horse has enemy in flank contact...it is forced to turn to face as well. Joe Collins I'm not sure I get it. Because the defending LH are on the table side edge, if the leading & centre LH both turn to face & conform to the attacking LH & Cv & the LH to the rear of the centre element (the trailing LH?) moves behind it, that trailing LH physically cannot fit into the space left without displacing all 3 of the left hand LH - where do they go? Are they off the table & therefore lost? Or adjusted in some other manner? I apologise that I cannot find a way to attach a diagram for more clarity but it is beyond my meager skills  Regards, j |
|
|
|
Post by martin on Oct 7, 2019 17:24:32 GMT
A complicated scenario. The center Lh turns to face. The trailing one moves in behind it...you will have to adjust the other part of the column (Lh 4,5,& 6). The leading light horse has enemy in flank contact...it is forced to turn to face as well. Joe Collins I'm not sure I get it. Because the defending LH are on the table side edge, if the leading & centre LH both turn to face & conform to the attacking LH & Cv & the LH to the rear of the centre element (the trailing LH?) moves behind it, that trailing LH physically cannot fit into the space left without displacing all 3 of the left hand LH - where do they go? Are they off the table & therefore lost? Or adjusted in some other manner? I apologise that I cannot find a way to attach a diagram for more clarity but it is beyond my meager skills Regards, j As Joe says, the two light horse (centre and last), turn to face the enemy, one behind the other. To allow room for this to happen the attacking elements are moved backwards to permit the Lighthorse pair to turn |
|
|
|
Post by paulisper on Oct 7, 2019 20:51:57 GMT
Agree with Joe and Smiffy here 😎👍
P
|
|
|
|
Post by lkmjbc on Oct 7, 2019 21:31:57 GMT
Oh, I see your question...
The Lh are adjusted to fit. Phil gives no exact details on how to do this... and for good reason. One simply cannot easily envision and answer every scenario.
In the open field... Lh 4,5,6 and six would simply be moved sideways the minimum amount needed to make the turning elements fit.
The board edge complicates things. The only real example we are given in turning situations is one of elements moving backwards.
I would move the Lh backwards the minimum distance necessary to allow the turning elements to fit.
Again, there is no hard fast rule here... and the players are left to themselves to sort out the best solution.
Joe Collins
|
|
|
|
Post by j on Oct 7, 2019 23:18:36 GMT
That makes sense... I think. It was really the table edge that was giving us the problems.
Just to clarify:
The LH column had its left flank on the table edge.
^ ^
LH4 LH1 <LH
LH5 LH2* <Cv
LH6 LH3 <Kn*
LH2* turns to face & conforms with the enemy Cv
LH3 trails behind to stay in support of LH2*
This results in LH5 & 6 being adjusted backwards to accomodate LH3
LH1 also turns to face & conform to the enemy LH (I wasn't sure this was a legal contact but I'll go with it)
LH4 remains where it is, giving the following close combats
1. LH1 CF2 vs enemy LH CF2
2. LH2* with LH3 in support CF2+1 for General +1 for Rear Support = 4 vs enemy Cv CF 3
This looks right, is it?
Regards,
j
|
|
|
|
Post by lkmjbc on Oct 8, 2019 0:58:16 GMT
Yes, I think you have it!
The contact is allowed because one element of the group is making the correct contact. Only one element needs to do so.
Single element moves would weirdly mean that the Lh couldn't contact as most enemy conforming is restricted to a front edge contact. Here we have the contactor hitting a side edge.
Well, you can't have everything. I've attempted to formulate an exploit using this...but I haven't come up with anything.
We did talk some about this during development...but..."difficult cases make bad law" as they say
Joe Collins
|
|
|
|
Post by martin on Oct 8, 2019 2:24:12 GMT
I disagree on one point at least. I agree that the LH pair 2 and 3 turn as a column to face. However, I think the LH 5 and 6 stay put, and the - attacking group- moves back enough to allow the realignment .
My rules not with me, but somewhere in conforming there is a comment along the lines of “if the defender can’t conform the attacker moves to allow conforming” , and somewhere down the line it says something like “if this can’t happen the contact cannot happen” (?)
|
|
|
|
Post by lkmjbc on Oct 8, 2019 3:38:53 GMT
Well, kind of...
Those thoughts you state are really not in their correct context...
However... and a big however...
I am not adverse to your solution...
Really, the only guidance we have here I think is the rule for contacting three elements. In that case, the last element backs up to make room.
I was just applying that same thinking. Having the bounding player back up to make room certainly isn't unreasonable and in fact probably leaves the Lh group in a worse position.
This of course is a problem brought on by an artificial concept... the board edge. I think both solutions work.
Joe Collins
|
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Oct 8, 2019 8:08:29 GMT
I agree with Martin.
Page 10 Turning to Face a Flank or Rear Contact, line three;
“Any existing contacts are adjusted by moving the elements forward, back or the minimum distance sideways to maintain contact”.
As this takes place after the movement phase, enemy Cv and LH would move back to allow the two deep LH columns to face a flank attack, leaving LH 4, 5 and 6 holding their precarious position.
|
|
|
|
Post by j on Oct 8, 2019 13:08:46 GMT
I can see the appeal of both Joe's & Martin's arguments. Although there seems to be no rule directly addressing this, we can extrapolate either.
If I have this right:
The first leaves the LH column more fragmented with a LH1 vs enemy LH; LH2* with 3 in support vs enemy Cv. LH4 is on its own in its original position, seperated from LH 5 & 6 (adjusted backwards in supported column) by LH3. The LH column is now in 3 groups, 2 facing forward, 1 facing the flank attack.
The second leaves the same combat situation albeit with the attacking group adjusted backwards to accomodate the insertion of LH3 behind LH2* but LH4, 5 & 6 remain intact as a group. The LH column is now in 2 groups, a column of 3 facing forward & the combat facing the flank.
I can live with either & I presume that each solution would be pertinent whether the table edge was an issue or not?
Regards,
j
|
|
|
|
Post by lkmjbc on Oct 8, 2019 14:07:41 GMT
I agree with Martin. Page 10 Turning to Face a Flank or Rear Contact, line three; “Any existing contacts are adjusted by moving the elements forward, back or the minimum distance sideways to maintain contact”. As this takes place after the movement phase, enemy Cv and LH would move back to allow the two deep LH columns to face a flank attack, leaving LH 4, 5 and 6 holding their precarious position. Good find on this Robert. I had forgotten this section. It does seem the bounding player makes room. Joe Collins |
|
|
|
Post by ronisan on Oct 17, 2019 15:55:34 GMT
Hello J,
I would like to show you the way I would play it ... but I didn't figure out, how to attach pictures here???
Cheers,
Ronald
|
|
|
|
Post by ronisan on Oct 17, 2019 16:17:09 GMT
Ok – can‘t upload my sketch, so I‘ll try it in words:
STEP 1
See page 9 of the rulebook: MOVING INTO CONTACT WITH ENEMY
„... or at least one element of a contacting group must be lined up ...“
Because your CV has a legal contact to the flank of LH 2 your whole group (CV + LH ) has legal contact!
STEP 2
See page 10 of the rulebook: TURNING TO FACE A FLANK OR REAR CONTACT
After the movement phase LH 2 and LH 1 turn right because they were contacted in their (whole) flank! -> CC to their contactors.
There is no "rear support"-rule needed in this situation, because LH1 is not in CC at the beginning of the bound!
LH 3 does not turn (see pike element Y1 in fig. 14c/page 23) but is moved backwards to make room for LH 2!
LH 4,5 and 6 stay in place!
By the way ... the table edge doesn't mind in your situation. ;-)
|
|
