|
|
Post by sheffmark on Jun 26, 2020 8:30:46 GMT
The chariot has not met enemy according to the scenario shown, so is not in contact, despite the closeness of the matter. Had it done so its move would have stopped immediately on reaching the CV element due to its rear corner meeting the enemy element. This allows the chariot to move normally in the next (Irish) turn. However, its options are constrained by the TZ of the CV. If it moved to attack the blades, it would violate the CV TZ by moving in a disallowed direction. Turing to face the CV does not violate the blades TZ as the chariot is not in it (despite being exactly a base width away). With the expenditure of a pip; it can turn to face the CV without being in contact, contact the CV or move backwards a full move (and likely take it off table). As I understand it, if you are exactly a base width away from an enemy element you are in their Threat Zone. Therefore the chariot is in the TZ of both the Bd and the Cv and as such could normally contact either, (that's presuming that you don't take the last sentence of Destroyed Elements on page 12 to mean it should be destroyed by being in contact on it's flank whilst recoiling.) But in this case I presume actually being in contact with the Cv would force it to turn to face that, rather than go back in against the blades. |
|
|
|
Post by ronisan on Jun 26, 2020 10:52:53 GMT
And what about being allowed to leave both TZs by moving straight backwards? (If the battleboard wouldn‘t end there?). For me it would be an option for the Ch if the Cv wouldn‘t contact it’s flank edge. But in contact with the front edge of the Cv... is it really an option for the Ch to get out of this mess by moving straight backwards??
|
|
|
|
Post by diades on Jun 26, 2020 12:00:02 GMT
Hi guys. Would someone be so kind as to summarise the rationale for the Facebook conclusion for future reference?
As I now see it, a recoiling element whose...rear corner meets ... enemy...already in such contact...cannot recoil and is destroyed instead.
|
|
|
|
Post by menacussecundus on Jun 26, 2020 13:16:47 GMT
Hi guys. Would someone be so kind as to summarise the rationale for the Facebook conclusion for future reference? As I now see it, a recoiling element whose...rear corner meets ... enemy...already in such contact...cannot recoil and is destroyed instead. Depends what you mean - or rather what the writer meant - by "meets". Is it "touch at any point"? Or "bash into"/"collide with"? Consensus view was that grazing the edge of the Cv doesn't constitute "meeting" and therefore doesn't equate to contact. (I hope I've summarised this correctly.) If the Bd/LCh combat had been, say, half a BW forward, would the LCh stop its recoil when it reaches the left-hand corner of the Cv or does it recoil its full base depth and end up half way along the Cv's front edge? |
|
|
|
Post by lkmjbc on Jun 26, 2020 13:52:46 GMT
Yes, this was answered by the FAQ some time ago.
Joe Collins
|
|
|
|
Post by arnopov on Jun 26, 2020 15:31:29 GMT
The exact paragraph is (thank F**K for OCR!)
"A recoiling or pushed back element whose rear edge or rear corner meets terrain it cannot enter, a battlefield edge, friends it cannot pass through or push back, enemy or a city, fort or camp ends its move there. An element already in such contact with any of these cannot recoil and is destroyed instead."
Weird definitions of "meet" don't come into it. The 2nd sentence is unfortunately clear enough: If rear edge or rear corner is already in contact with enemy, then recoiling element is destroyed. That is what this sentence says. It's obviously nonsense, but it's what is written. I guess that was missed at the editing stage because we didn't read it properly, we already know what this sentence is supposed to mean.
It is nonsense, because, as written, this sentence implies that element 1 would be destroyed instead of recoiling against B (A and B point down, 1 points up): after all, the left-rear corner of element 1 is in contact with the enemy (here A). I'm sure that's not the desired outcome.
........BBBB
........vvvv
AAAA^^^^
AAAA1111
vvvv
|
|
|
|
Post by paulisper on Jun 26, 2020 15:52:07 GMT
The exact paragraph is (thank F**K for OCR!)
"A recoiling or pushed back element whose rear edge or rear corner meets terrain it cannot enter, a battlefield edge, friends it cannot pass through or push back, enemy or a city, fort or camp ends its move there. An element already in such contact with any of these cannot recoil and is destroyed instead."
Weird definitions of "meet" don't come into it. The 2nd sentence is unfortunately clear enough: If rear edge or rear corner is already in contact with enemy, then recoiling element is destroyed. That is what this sentence says. It's obviously nonsense, but it's what is written. I guess that was missed at the editing stage because we didn't read it properly, we already know what this sentence is supposed to mean.
It is nonsense, because, as written, this sentence implies that element 1 would be destroyed instead of recoiling against B (A and B point down, 1 points up): after all, the left-rear corner of element 1 is in contact with the enemy (here A). I'm sure that's not the desired outcome.
........BBBB
........vvvv
AAAA^^^^
AAAA1111
vvvv Spot on, Arnopov, and was the gist of the argument on FB. Clearly, this shouldn’t be the case, so option 1 was discarded and then we were into what the outcome of the recoil would be - should the chariot turn at the end of combat or at the end of the next bound’s movement phase? I would argue the former and it would fight the Cv next bound... P |
|
|
|
Post by menacussecundus on Jun 26, 2020 16:24:37 GMT
The exact paragraph is (thank F**K for OCR!)
"A recoiling or pushed back element whose rear edge or rear corner meets terrain it cannot enter, a battlefield edge, friends it cannot pass through or push back, enemy or a city, fort or camp ends its move there. An element already in such contact with any of these cannot recoil and is destroyed instead."
Weird definitions of "meet" don't come into it. The 2nd sentence is unfortunately clear enough: If rear edge or rear corner is already in contact with enemy, then recoiling element is destroyed. That is what this sentence says. It's obviously nonsense, but it's what is written. I guess that was missed at the editing stage because we didn't read it properly, we already know what this sentence is supposed to mean.
It is nonsense, because, as written, this sentence implies that element 1 would be destroyed instead of recoiling against B (A and B point down, 1 points up): after all, the left-rear corner of element 1 is in contact with the enemy (here A). I'm sure that's not the desired outcome.
........BBBB
........vvvv
AAAA^^^^
AAAA1111
vvvv It would also mean that an element which started a combat with its side edge flush with a Wwy or a city would be destroyed on a recoil - even if it had space to recoil (and even if it controlled the city). And presumably the first LCh - the one which fought the Cv - would also be destroyed as its rear corner starts in contact with a friendly element it cannot pass through or push back. |
|
|
|
Post by diades on Jun 28, 2020 16:10:20 GMT
So, for my second u-turn in three posts, (I will be in government soon), I am satisfied that the written text is not to be accepted. I therefore revert to my original thoughts that a move to the rear is still an option after the recoil.
|
|
|
|
Post by gonatas on Jun 29, 2020 11:08:38 GMT
Hi guys
Can I try to throw a spanner into the works with my understanding of the situation. Please feel free to disagree.
In the rules about Fleeing " (An element) is destroyed if it starts with an enemy front edge in contact with its flank or rear edges"
In other words if it is hard flanked and has to flee it is destroyed as soon as it starts to flee. The key word is "starts".
In the rules about Destroyed elements " An element that has an enemy front edge in contact with its side or rear edge is destroyed by recoiling....."
In this rule there is no requirement that the recoiling element has to start its recoil with a hard flank for it to be destroyed.
This difference in wording means, in my view, that an element which recoils and which, at some stage in its recoil, finds that it has an enemy front edge in contact with its side edge, is destroyed.
It would follow that, in the example in question, the light chariot is destroyed. This is not because it is unable to recoil, corner to corner contact does not prevent enemy elements from sliding along each others flanks for example. Rather it is destroyed because it has the misfortune to slide along an enemy front edge during its recoil.
This seems to me to make sense of the rules. As always I am assuming that Phil Barker intended not to waste a word and that every word inserted is there because it is intended to have an impact.
So what am I missing? I look forward to your thoughts.
Gonatas
|
|
|
|
Post by menacussecundus on Jun 29, 2020 11:41:44 GMT
What I think you may be missing is that the sentence from the rules about "Destroyed elements" includes "fleeing" as well as "recoiling".
I don't think there is any significance to the fact that the writer uses "has" in one place and "starts with" in another - except, perhaps, a desire to avoid repeating the same verb.
|
|
|
|
Post by medievalthomas on Jul 9, 2020 16:36:19 GMT
There is no right or wrong answer possible but just schools of thought.
But umpires have to rule and if I had to rule this is what I'd do:
Generally for lots of good reasons corner to corner is not considered contact nor are the side edge of a TZ considered "in". So the element can begin its Recoil and is not Destoryed.
But where does it stop? Generally you can't contact the front edge of an enemy element with your side edge - but this is a rule for Tactical Moves not Outcome moves (and as we all known we must not confuse them). So I would allow the full Recoil.
But what happens then? I would apply this rule: "Elements contacted this bound by enemy or whose front edge is still in contact when combat ends automatically conform if necessary." (Last sentence 1st para of "Moving into Contact With Enemy.) So by Recoiling the Element has been "contacted this bound by enemy" so it must automatically conform if necessary (and it is necessary because of the side contact) when the combat ends (so immediately as the Recoil ended the Combat). This rule is really in place to deal with Pursuers who contact new opponents as an Outcome move but could be logically extended to Recoilers ending in contact. The resulting Combat is resolved in the next Combat Phase.
But for home games just do what feels right between the two players.
TomT
|
|
|
|
Post by medievalthomas on Jul 9, 2020 16:48:06 GMT
I'm also very interested in what people think the rule should be. My playtesters don't like the idea of allowing an Recoiling element to slide along the front edge of on opposing element as this is not permitted generally.
Should contact with an enemy element Destroy Recoilers? Even if they can start the Recoil. In lobbying (hard) for the current rule my intent was just to avoid having your elements Destroyed because they bumped into your own cock eyed friends. This seemed far to deadly such that your own troops were more dangerous than the enemy. But somehow it got expended to all elements.
Any thoughts on what should be as oppose to what rule parsing of the Purple Book my yield as an answer.
TomT
|
|
|
|
Post by goragrad on Jul 9, 2020 20:15:15 GMT
I think that, at least in part, this goes back the the fact that an element of troops is not a solid block of men occupying the entire space covered in the base. Neither the recoiling element or that alongside its path back would necessarily be withing yards of each other in reality.
I think that medievalthomas' view is the proper interpretation - the element recoils and then turns to face the new threat.
|
|
|
|
Post by paulisper on Jul 9, 2020 20:29:39 GMT
There is no right or wrong answer possible but just schools of thought. But umpires have to rule and if I had to rule this is what I'd do: Generally for lots of good reasons corner to corner is not considered contact nor are the side edge of a TZ considered "in". So the element can begin its Recoil and is not Destoryed. But where does it stop? Generally you can't contact the front edge of an enemy element with your side edge - but this is a rule for Tactical Moves not Outcome moves (and as we all known we must not confuse them). So I would allow the full Recoil. But what happens then? I would apply this rule: "Elements contacted this bound by enemy or whose front edge is still in contact when combat ends automatically conform if necessary." (Last sentence 1st para of "Moving into Contact With Enemy.) So by Recoiling the Element has been "contacted this bound by enemy" so it must automatically conform if necessary (and it is necessary because of the side contact) when the combat ends (so immediately as the Recoil ended the Combat). This rule is really in place to deal with Pursuers who contact new opponents as an Outcome move but could be logically extended to Recoilers ending in contact. The resulting Combat is resolved in the next Combat Phase. But for home games just do what feels right between the two players. TomT I agree with your logic and approach to solving this issue and would rule this way at the Northern Cup, if it ever came up. P |
|
