|
|
Post by j on Aug 23, 2020 22:55:38 GMT
I feel I should know this but I'm not sure...
Opponent's left Sp & right Sp attacked me
His right Sp contacted an element of my Sp with its own right flank anchored on a friendly City/BUA
So his left Sp was in contact with the Denizen defended BUA
Can either or both of his Sp elements claim side support?
Regards,
j
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Aug 24, 2020 8:36:22 GMT
Here is how I interpret things.
In the following situation:-
____
/ City \ Sp
| or | Sp Sp
\ Fort / ↑
...the left-hand red Spear gets +1 for the friendly side-support, but also a -1 for
being overlapped by the City/occupied Fort (just as it would if it were in a mutual
side-edge to side-edge position with an enemy...it’s overlapped, but doesn’t have
an enemy front-edge in contact with its flank, so can recoil without being destroyed).
The blue Spear gets -1 for being overlapped by one of the red Spears, but gains no
+1 for side-support, even if the City/Fort were garrisoned by a friendly Spear or
Blade (the garrison is spread around the entire perimeter, and is not in a formation
that is able to give side-support).
|
|
|
|
Post by j on Aug 24, 2020 15:26:37 GMT
Here is how I interpret things. In the following situation:- ____
/ City \ Sp
| or | Sp Sp
\ Fort / ↑That's very helpful for reminding me that the City/Fort can overlap but wasn't the situation we were in which was Sp Sp1 < ICity I Sp2 < | or | IFort I with the red Sp attacking right to left, red Sp1 vs blue Sp, red Sp2 on its left flank vs the Denizens in the City. My question being: do both red Sp side support each other? Regards, j |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Aug 24, 2020 16:06:19 GMT
Oh, in that case the following applies:- Close combat against a city, fort or camp [on page 10, paragraph 9]:- “Troops assaulting or defending these use their combat factor against foot and do not count overlaps or flank or rear-support.” Red Spear2 is assaulting the blue City, so can’t claim side-support. And Red Spear1 can’t claim side-support either, as their mates are busy assaulting. (It must be hard to form a ‘shield-wall’ when you’re halfway up a scaling ladder. ) |
|
|
|
Post by haywire on Aug 24, 2020 16:18:35 GMT
Stevie,
Where in the rules does it talk about city/fort overlaps?
I can see on p 10 that it discusses corner to corner element contacts giving overlaps, but cannot find anything to indicate that cities/forts give overlaps.
IanH
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Aug 24, 2020 16:56:59 GMT
Good point Haywire...unfortunately, I can’t find anywhere where it says they don’t either.  All we have is Close combat against a city, fort or camp [on page 10, paragraph 9]:- “Troops assaulting or defending (Cities/Forts/Camps) use their combat factor against foot and do not count overlaps or flank or rear-support.” While Combat to both front and to flank when overlapping [on page10, paragraph 7] says:- “When an element is in close combat both to front and to flank or rear or in close combat to its front and overlapped, only it and the enemy element in front fight each other. Others only provide tactical factors.” I don’t see the words “Cities & Forts never overlap their enemies”. (just that they don’t overlap enemies that are assaulting them) Page 10 paragraph 8 goes on to say:- " Any enemies in any mutual flank-edge contact overlap each other whether in close combat or not." Again, no mention of "Cities & Forts never overlap their enemies”. |
|
|
|
Post by haywire on Aug 24, 2020 17:54:00 GMT
The rules seem to only mention elements overlapping, so you could also argue that cities and forts do not overlap.
|
|
|
|
Post by menacussecundus on Aug 24, 2020 18:02:49 GMT
I can't see any reason why Red Sp1 cannot claim side support from Red Sp 2. They are "in frontal close combat against enemy foot" and have "at least one flank edge...in mutual side edge and mutual front corner contact with a friendly element". Nothing to say that if an element is assaulting a BUA it cannot provide side support to another element.
|
|
|
|
Post by haywire on Aug 24, 2020 19:08:42 GMT
Consider the situation of an element (A), with its side against a friendly fort (B), with one front corner of A in contact with the corner of the fort, so that the front of A is inline with an edge of B:
A is now frontally attacked by an enemy element X. Is X overlapped by B?
BBBBBBBB0000
BBBBBBBBAAAA
BBBBBBBBAAAA
00000000XXXX
00000000XXXX
000000000000
(zero represents empty space)
I don't think X is overlapped by B. B cannot sally out to threaten X, and if they are blades (rather than crossbows etc.) they cannot throw much at X to harm it.
|
|
|
|
Post by menacussecundus on Aug 24, 2020 19:51:48 GMT
Good point Haywire...unfortunately, I can’t find anywhere where it says they don’t either. All we have is Close combat against a city, fort or camp [on page 10, paragraph 9]:- “Troops assaulting or defending (Cities/Forts/Camps) use their combat factor against foot and do not count overlaps or flank or rear-support.” While Combat to both front and to flank when overlapping [on page10, paragraph 7] says:- “When an element is in close combat both to front and to flank or rear or in close combat to its front and overlapped, only it and the enemy element in front fight each other. Others only provide tactical factors.” I don’t see the words “Cities & Forts never overlap their enemies”. (just that they don’t overlap enemies that are assaulting them) Page 10 paragraph 8 goes on to say:- " Any enemies in any mutual flank-edge contact overlap each other whether in close combat or not." Again, no mention of "Cities & Forts never overlap their enemies”. The rules don't need to spell out that cites and forts never overlap their enemies. They don't have front corners and they don't have flank edges. Ergo, they cannot overlap an enemy element as defined in the rules. |
|
|
|
Post by menacussecundus on Aug 24, 2020 19:52:26 GMT
Consider the situation of an element (A), with its side against a friendly fort (B), with one front corner of A in contact with the corner of the fort, so that the front of A is inline with an edge of B: A is now frontally attacked by an enemy element X. Is X overlapped by B? BBBBBBBB0000 BBBBBBBBAAAA BBBBBBBBAAAA 00000000XXXX 00000000XXXX 000000000000 (zero represents empty space) I don't think X is overlapped by B. B cannot sally out to threaten X, and if they are blades (rather than crossbows etc.) they cannot throw much at X to harm it. I agree. |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Aug 24, 2020 20:24:03 GMT
Good points everyone. It’s probably just me taking the rules-as-written toooo literary. Anyway, I think it would be better if the rules did actually say “Cities & Forts (and Camps) never overlap their enemies”. We will just have to add the missing words ourselves...  As for the red spears giving or receiving side-support, as I said before, "it must be hard to form a ‘shield-wall’ when you’re halfway up a scaling ladder!"... ...no matter what the rules do or don't say. |
|
|
|
Post by menacussecundus on Aug 24, 2020 20:50:34 GMT
Good points everyone. It’s probably just me taking the rules-as-written toooo literary. Anyway, I think it would be better if the rules did actually say “Cities & Forts (and Camps) never overlap their enemies”. We will just have to add the missing words ourselves... As for the red spears giving or receiving side-support, as I said before, "it must be hard to form a ‘shield-wall’ when you’re halfway up a scaling ladder!"... ...no matter what the rules do or don't say. Pretty hard to climb a scaling ladder when your feet are glued to a base that has two or three of your mates stuck to it as well. |
|
|
|
Post by j on Aug 24, 2020 22:02:27 GMT
Oh, in that case the following applies:- Close combat against a city, fort or camp [on page 10, paragraph 9]:- “Troops assaulting or defending these use their combat factor against foot and do not count overlaps or flank or rear-support.” Red Spear2 is assaulting the blue City, so can’t claim side-support. And Red Spear1 can’t claim side-support either, as their mates are busy assaulting. (It must be hard to form a ‘shield-wall’ when you’re halfway up a scaling ladder. )Very clear thanks. In which case, I wuz robbed! It didn't look right to me at the time but I couldn't put my finger on the rule to back it up.Let's hope I remember it next time... Regards, j |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Aug 25, 2020 9:20:47 GMT
Pretty hard to climb a scaling ladder when your feet are glued to a base that has two or three of your mates stuck to it as well. Ha! By that logic no-one can ever climb a scaling ladder, so cannot assault up a wall... ...especially mounted, who are not only glued to a base, but are glued to their mount’s saddle, so can never temporarily dismount to ascend scaling ladders when they assault Cities and Forts. (unless they stay in their saddles and force their mounts to do the climbing up the ladders! ) We can’t expect the rules to cover every possible weird situation. Otherwise the rule book would be the size of a telephone directory! Sometimes we have to use a little bit of common sense here and there... |
|
)
