wote
Munifex
Posts: 24
|
Post by wote on Apr 6, 2021 10:19:38 GMT
Apologies; I'm late to the party as ever  Just a reminder, that there are some who think that Stevies trick isnt working. (There was a big discussion about it.) The discussion is about the famous first sentence in the combat section stating, that combat always happens if the front edge of the attacker touches an enemy element. Could someone please post a link to the big discussion? I'd like to read up... Just to throw some more petrol on the fire  , there is also the following to consider. Yes, the first sentence of Contacting The Enemy on page 9 says:- “The general principle is that troops that would contact in real life do so in the game so that moving a front edge into contact with an enemy always results in combat.” Take this just as it is purely on its own and there is no such thing as an ‘illegal contact’... ... any front edge touching causes close combat, no matter the situation or position. Ah, but then the very next sentence goes on to say:- “At the end of the bound’s movement phase the contacting element (or at least one element of a contacting group) must be lined-up with an enemy element, either in (a), (b), (c) or (d) positions, with mutual corners touching. If this is not possible, the move does not happen.” So which is it? Any front-edge contact causes close combat? Or front-edge contact AND lining-up so that the mutual corners are also touching? I think most people would say that the first sentence ‘general principle’ is just that... ...nothing more than a vague ill defined general principle that needs clarification, and this extra detail and clarification is provided by the second sentence above. Otherwise the ‘general principle’ taken purely on its own contradicts (a), (b), (c) & (d). Front-edges ’always’ cause combat...but you can’t end a move unless the corners touch.But what if conforming is prevented due to a lack of space?:- “If conforming to a front edge by contactors is prevented, contacted elements or groups must either conform or fight as if in full contact and overlapped.” Note that this only applies when trying to move into contact with an enemy FRONT-edge, and not when trying to contact an enemy flank or rear-edge. Soooo, putting it all together, we have the following:- * a moving element/group must conform (i.e. get those corners touching) when they contact a group. * if the moving element/group is contacting the enemy FRONT and doesn’t have the room, then those contacted must conform instead or fight as if overlapped. * however, if the moving element/group is NOT contacting the enemy front and doesn’t have the room, then tough...the contact is illegal.
I'm a noob, but isn't there also a remark in the introduction (p1) to the effect that DBA3 intended to mitigate awkward geometry-based plays like this one?
That aside, what should be made of the last line of the first para under MOVING INTO CONTACT WITH ENEMY: "Elements contacted this bound by enemy or whose front edge is still in contact when combat ends automatically conform if necessary." (emphasis mine)? |
|
wote
Munifex
Posts: 24
|
Post by wote on Apr 6, 2021 10:23:12 GMT
Sorry again, I'm not sure why the last two paras of my post look bigger and uglier. No shouting or extra emphasis was intended, ProBoards has just inexplicably drawn it that way...
|
|
|
|
Post by lkmjbc on Apr 6, 2021 13:06:51 GMT
Yes, Proboards on occasion does odd things to posts...
Instead of raising this old thread, I would suggest starting a new, fresh one. I think that would be more clear...
Joe Collins
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Apr 7, 2021 9:41:52 GMT
You were quite right Wote to follow Joe Collins suggestion to start a new thread on this subject, but I think you may have used the wrong title, as your concerns relate to ‘Conforming’ and not ‘Pikes’. The thing about DBA (or any set of rules for that matter) is you can’t just pluck out a single sentence. Each sentence must take into consideration the sentences both before and after it, and be used in the right context. The first sentence of the Page 9 Moving Into Contact, which says “The general principle is that moving a front edge into contact with an enemy always results in combat” is not an end-point... ...it is just a mid-point. The actual sequence of events is:- ① Make Tactical Moves that end in legal contact positions. ② If the front-edge is in contact then fight in close combat. ③ Perform all the post combat outcomes. And Page 9 gives a strict list of the ONLY legal end-of-move-phase contact positions:- (a) in full mutual front-edge contact (sliding so corners touch), or (b) in full front-edge to rear-edge contact (with corners touching), or (c) in front-edge to side-edge contact (with front corners touching), or (d) with no enemy in contact to its front, but in an overlap position (see p.10). (Actually, there is a fifth unmentioned contact position...”In mutual side-edge contact”,
but that comes under (d) an overlap position.
Note that mutual side-edge contact is the ONLY legal contact position that doesn’t require
the corners to touch each other)As I said before (highlighted in blue)...yes, front-edges ’always’ cause combat... ...but you can’t end a move unless the corners touch. As for:- ...what should be made of the last line of the first para under MOVING INTO CONTACT WITH ENEMY: " Elements contacted this bound by enemy or whose front edge is still in contact when combat ends automatically conform if necessary." (emphasis mine)? ...this is clarified by the very next paragraph, which says “Single elements and groups conform to a group” etc, and “Unless turning-to-face, contacted elements conform on contact”. As for mitigating awkward geometric ploys, DBA 3.0 is a vast improvement over the older DBA 2.2 rules (which my group gave up using decades ago, as it was far too unrealistic and ‘gamey’), but they can still happen on occasions... ...if players play by the rules ‘as-they-are-written’ and don’t break or change any of them. ---------------------------------- BTW, few if any players realise that DBA is actually played on a ‘semi-virtual grid with 1 BW squares’. Oh, you can measure and move your troops pretty much as you like (depending on Threat Zones), but as soon as you touch an enemy element, elaborate and complicated rules come into play to force you to conform as if you were playing on a 1 BW square grid. I’m currently working on a simplified version of DBA to take away all this complexity, by simply extending this principle to cover ALL movement (see fanaticus.boards.net/post/36374/ ). This is surprisingly easy to do...just make all movement and measuring in whole units of 1 BW, with no fractions, and all elements have a 1 BW x 1 BW card beneath them. In other words, you move a BW or not at all, and all units/terrain/table-edges are whole BW’s apart. |
|
wote
Munifex
Posts: 24
|
Post by wote on Apr 7, 2021 11:00:07 GMT
You were quite right Wote to follow Joe Collins suggestion to start a new thread on this subject, but I think you may have used the wrong title, as your concerns relate to ‘Conforming’ and not ‘Pikes’. I agree. Cromwell in fact moved the posts (upon my request) so perhaps I could impose yet further and request he also rename this new topic to "Conforming" as suggested? |
|
wote
Munifex
Posts: 24
|
Post by wote on Apr 7, 2021 12:10:26 GMT
Thanks for your detailed reply stevie . ...but you can’t end a move unless the corners touch. I agree, but the move phase isn't ended until after any allowable/required conforming is completed. E.g., in the specific case you illustrated over in the other topic (which gave rise to this topic): Ps
Cv Sp Sp Sp Sp Sp Sp Sp Sp Sp Cv
Pk Pk Pk Kn Cv (<--- facing) Ax Pk Pk Pk (<--- facing) Ax Ps CvHere the red Ax are together in a group facing to their left. Neither the end Ax nor the end Pk can be attacked in the flank. Because to be in close combat you must have front corners touching at the end of the move phase, and there just isn’t room. Why can't the blue Sp move forward to contact the side edge (without corner-to-corner contact) of the red Ax, who then "automatically conforms" (per the sentence quoted below) by moving slightly forward so that corner contact is achieved, before the move is ended? As for:- ...what should be made of the last line of the first para under MOVING INTO CONTACT WITH ENEMY: " Elements contacted this bound by enemy or whose front edge is still in contact when combat ends automatically conform if necessary." (emphasis mine)? ...this is clarified by the very next paragraph, which says “Single elements and groups conform to a group” etc, and “Unless turning-to-face, contacted elements conform on contact”. Mmm. Perhaps another reading is that this sentence instead completes the paragraph it concludes. That interpretation would then have the whole paragraph reading something like this: 1. The general principle is that troops that would contact in real life do so in the game... (in the above scenario it seems likely--to the unsophisticated observer--that the blue Sp should go straight into the side of red Ax.)2. Front edge contact results in combat (Sure).3. At the end of the bound's movement phase the contacting element ... must be lined-up with an enemy element, either: a, b, c, or d, else the move doesn't happen. (Note: at the end of the movement phase, so after tactical movement and any allowable/required conforming).4. One party moves the minimum distance to so conform. (Note: one party, so either the contactor or the contacted, moves ... to so conform. This seems explicit that conforming is required to "so conform" to a, b, c, or d).
Then we have two sentences that explain these conforming movements. The first is for the contactor, the second is for the contacted.5. Contactors conform using their tactical move .... an extra sideways slide of up to 1BW (The contactor conforms via his tactical move and then, after that is completed, may slide up to 1 BW along the enemy front edge).6. Elements contacted .... automatically conform if necessary. (The contacted element(s) "conform if necessary"--again, after the tactical movement is completed. In the above scenario, isn't it necessary--in order to satisfy "c" of the a, b, c, d allowable moves--that after the Sp has completed its tactical move the contacted Ax moves forward to conform by making front corner-to-corner contact with the Sp? Thereby conforming to "c" before the move is ended?)I'll be interested to hear whether folks think this interpretation holds any water...  |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Apr 7, 2021 13:38:32 GMT
...but you can’t end a move unless the corners touch. I agree, but the move phase isn't ended until after any allowable/required conforming is completed. E.g., in the specific case you illustrated over in the other topic (which gave rise to this topic): Ps
Cv Sp Sp Sp Sp Sp Sp Sp Sp Sp Cv
Pk Pk Pk Kn Cv (<--- facing) Ax Pk Pk Pk (<--- facing) Ax Ps CvHere the red Ax are together in a group facing to their left. Neither the end Ax nor the end Pk can be attacked in the flank. Because to be in close combat you must have front corners touching at the end of the move phase, and there just isn’t room. Why can't the blue Sp move forward to contact the side edge (without corner-to-corner contact) of the red Ax, who then "automatically conforms" (per the sentence quoted below) by moving slightly forward so that corner contact is achieved, before the move is ended? Ah...you are missing out a whole paragraph of the rules.  Page 9, third paragraph from the bottom, says:- “A single element contacting a single element conforms to it. A single element or group contacting a group conforms to that group. A single element contacted by a group conforms to it, unless itself is entirely in bad and/or rough going, then the group conforms. (Note that only front-edges trigger conforming, not front-corners, see the FAQ.
And conforming does not force groups to split - see Figures 13c and 13d,
but Turning-to-Face does).Page 9 Moving Into Contact is quite clear:- “At the end of the bound’s movement phase the contacting conforming element or at least one element of a contacting conforming group must be lined-up with an enemy element, in either (a), (b), (c) or (d) positions. (And Turning-To-Face only occurs “Immediately after the movement phase”,
after all elements have already been lined-up in (a), (b), (c) or (d) positions)The stationary Auxiliaries are together in a group... So the moving single/group of Spears must do the conforming... But there isn’t room to get those front corners touching... And the Spears can’t claim to be physically blocked, as they are not contacting an enemy FRONT-edge. Therefore, an illegal contact (see also Figure 10 on page 20). Yes...I know it’s daft, but it’s what the rules say. Another daft example is when a group of say Auxiliaries or Cavalry is placed so that their rear is actually touching an impassable obstacle, such as a Waterway or a table-edge. They too cannot be attacked in the flank, as the moving enemy element/group must do the conforming, but can’t do so because they can’t get those corners to touch without partly leaving the table or entering the Waterway. Now... IF Turning-To-Face happened instantly on contact instead of waiting, or IFthe word “front” were removed from “ If conforming to a front edge by contactors is prevented”, then these daft things wouldn’t happen... ...but that is not what the rules-as-written say. All I can say is (♫ big drum roll ♪) “I didn’t write the rules”. |
|
wote
Munifex
Posts: 24
|
Post by wote on Apr 7, 2021 23:00:51 GMT
Yes, I see what you mean stevie . I was overly focused on a single Ax, but it's specifically because the Ax is in a group that it can't conform. Hence an opponent can apparently be delayed by intentionally exposing the flank of a line in a <1 BW wide space--so that the opponent cannot line up exactly, corner-to-corner. I'd be tempted to call it "a geometrical ploy" What (if anything) do folks deem to be the most appropriate club- or house-rule to address this? |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Apr 8, 2021 9:23:09 GMT
Well, I’m all up for changing the rules to improve clarity or realism. (see fanaticus.boards.net/thread/1146/house-rule-index ) The question is...which of the following four rules do we want to break or re-write?:- * allow elements to end a Move Phase when they’re NOT in positions (a), (b), (c), or (d)? * or make the stationary group conform to the moving element or group? * or make Turn-To-Face happen instantly on contact instead of artificially waiting to turn? * or remove the word “front”, so that it says “If conforming to an edge by contactors is prevented...” Personally, I favour having instant Turning-To-Face. This not only solves the “front-edge always causes combat” issue, but it also allows the bounding player (i.e. the one doing the moving) to decide which of their elements gets to fight when an enemy is sandwiched by a simultaneous front & flank attack...the first to make contact can turn the enemy. At the moment it does seem a bit odd that Knights are capable of smashing their way through most enemies when they charge them frontally, but when charging a flank (where they should be even deadlier) they are relegated to merely providing a -1 penalty, as if they were no more than lowly Psiloi! However, the simplest solution is to remove the word “front”. That would prevent this legal geometric ploy. It means that if the flank attacker doesn’t have the space to get their front-corner to touch the enemy front-corner, then instead of them having to conform those contacted have to do the conforming instead. |
|
|
|
Post by lkmjbc on Apr 8, 2021 17:16:03 GMT
This is a bit of a rough one. We discussed things much like this during the development of DBA 3. The argument came down to really two sets of competing goals... the first is attacker vs defender. The second was simplicity vs complexity.
The current rules still allow for a few odd geometric ploys that prevent combat. These are rare in real play, but still exist. Eliminating them completely is perhaps possible, but can have odd and possibly adverse effects of the balance between attacker and defender. Further, there are chances for follow-on geometric ploys that may require greater complexity to prevent.
The outcome of the debate was that we considered formations like the one above to be really not very advantageous to the defender. A good attacking player can take advantage of the strange formation to gain advantage. Thus, we rendered the rules as they are...
I am more interested in Tom's suggestion of forcing the players to conform as much as possible...
Joe Collins
|
|
wote
Munifex
Posts: 24
|
Post by wote on Apr 8, 2021 22:36:34 GMT
I am more interested in Tom's suggestion of forcing the players to conform as much as possible... Is this discussed in another topic here (or elsewhere) you could link us to? |
|
wote
Munifex
Posts: 24
|
Post by wote on Apr 8, 2021 22:48:02 GMT
Well, I’m all up for changing the rules to improve clarity or realism. (see fanaticus.boards.net/thread/1146/house-rule-index ) The question is...which of the following four rules do we want to break or re-write?:- * allow elements to end a Move Phase when they’re NOT in positions (a), (b), (c), or (d)? * or make the stationary group conform to the moving element or group? * or make Turn-To-Face happen instantly on contact instead of artificially waiting to turn? * or remove the word “front”, so that it says “If conforming to an edge by contactors is prevented...” Personally, I favour having instant Turning-To-Face. This not only solves the “front-edge always causes combat” issue, but it also allows the bounding player (i.e. the one doing the moving) to decide which of their elements gets to fight when an enemy is sandwiched by a simultaneous front & flank attack...the first to make contact can turn the enemy. At the moment it does seem a bit odd that Knights are capable of smashing their way through most enemies when they charge them frontally, but when charging a flank (where they should be even deadlier) they are relegated to merely providing a -1 penalty, as if they were no more than lowly Psiloi! However, the simplest solution is to remove the word “front”. That would prevent this legal geometric ploy. It means that if the flank attacker doesn’t have the space to get their front-corner to touch the enemy front-corner, then instead of them having to conform those contacted have to do the conforming instead. I like the immediate turn to face option also. The house-rule/amendment might look something like: Immediately after the movement phase, elements upon contact to flank or rear by an enemy front edge turn to face... What would be the indirect consequence of this change (if any)? In practical terms, I think this is pretty close to what typically happens in play (insofar as I recall it happening). When would it be materially different to complete all moves/conforms first, and then do all turns to face? |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Apr 8, 2021 23:59:32 GMT
I like the immediate turn to face option also. The house-rule/amendment might look something like: Immediately after the movement phase, elements upon contact to flank or rear by an enemy front edge turn to face... What would be the indirect consequence of this change (if any)? In practical terms, I think this is pretty close to what typically happens in play (insofar as I recall it happening). When would it be materially different to complete all moves/conforms first, and then do all turns to face? In a word, ‘Threat Zones’ (hang on...that’s two words!). Apparently the DBA 3.0 Development Team decided that pinning the Psiloi in front of an element was far more important than turning to face the greater threat about to hit their flank. If an element turns-to-face as soon as it’s contacted, their Threat Zone will also shift, freeing a formally pinned enemy, who could then move as they wished (although this freed enemy is still likely to charge into the newly revealed flank of the turned enemy in order to give them an addition -1 combat penalty rather than zoom off somewhere else). Now having instant-turning-to-face may seem to favour wide outflanking moves. But it also helps to make breakthroughs in the centre more decisive. Punch a hole in the enemy line and your victorious troops can still use their ‘quick-kill’ and combat factor to roll-up the enemy line instead of being castrated into just throwing insults and rocks by giving the enemy a mere -1 penalty as if they had suddenly turned into Psiloi. But how do you protect yourself from this flank attack? Oh, that's simple...in a word, use your own Threat Zones (that’s still two words Stevie), generated by your own reserves and flank guards to prevent the enemy from ‘hard flanking’ and ‘shutting the door’ on your troops. Any army that deploys in one long line with no reserves deserves to have their centre broken! The Romans understood this, which is why they had reserves in multiple lines behind their front. (By the way, it also makes the rules simpler, instead of adding an elaborate, complicated, artificial,
and unnecessary ‘Wait-To-Turn’ procedure.
Of course, this will only be a House Rule.
When playing in tournaments, you will still have to follow ‘the-rules-as-written’...
...no matter how absurd they are) |
|
wote
Munifex
Posts: 24
|
Post by wote on Apr 9, 2021 1:12:31 GMT
If an element turns-to-face as soon as it’s contacted, their Threat Zone will also shift, freeing a formally pinned enemy, who could then move as they wished (although this freed enemy is still likely to charge into the newly revealed flank of the turned enemy in order to give them an addition -1 combat penalty rather than zoom off somewhere else). Now having instant-turning-to-face may seem to favour wide outflanking moves. But it also helps to make breakthroughs in the centre more decisive. Punch a hole in the enemy line and your victorious troops can still use their ‘quick-kill’ and combat factor to roll-up the enemy line instead of being castrated into just throwing insults and rocks by giving the enemy a mere -1 penalty as if they had suddenly turned into Psiloi. But how do you protect yourself from this flank attack? Oh, that's simple...in a word, use your own Threat Zones (that’s still two words Stevie), generated by your own reserves and flank guards to prevent the enemy from ‘hard flanking’ and ‘shutting the door’ on your troops. Any army that deploys in one long line with no reserves deserves to have their centre broken! The Romans understood this, which is why they had reserves in multiple lines behind their front. (By the way, it also makes the rules simpler, instead of adding an elaborate, complicated, artificial,
and unnecessary ‘Wait-To-Turn’ procedure.
Of course, this will only be a House Rule.
When playing in tournaments, you will still have to follow ‘the-rules-as-written’...
...no matter how absurd they are)This sounds, broadly, quite desirable (if proactive play is deemed desirable). Fortune favours the bold, and all But I'm not sure about the breakthrough in the centerline scenario. If we had two lines in contact, a single kill somewhere in the middle of one line would not free the two adjacent elements from their existing frontal contacts, so they wouldn't turn to face a new flank threat in the middle. Or is this not what you had in mind? |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Apr 9, 2021 9:46:46 GMT
Perhaps I can illustrate what I mean with the aid of some crude diagrams. Sp Sp Sp Bd Sp Sp
Bd Bd Bd ↑ ↓ Ax
AxHere a line of Blades and Auxiliaries are fighting against a line of Spears. After much pushing and shoving one of the Blades managed to get a double-overlap on one of the Spears, killing it and pursuing into the gap. However, the adjacent Auxiliary was recoiled and bounced off the Spear. The Spears cannot turn to face this newly formed gap because they are either already being frontally engaged or are pinned by the red Threat Zones. In the next red bound, under the current ‘Wait-To-Turn’ rule, the red player could:- ① move both the Blade and the Auxiliary into contact, meaning the Auxiliary will do all the fighting (Ax CF 3 v Sp CF 4 +1 for side-support but -1 for being flanked, but the Sp will be destroyed if it recoils due to the flank attack). --- OR--- ② just move the Blade on its own into the Spear’s flank, which will turn after waiting. (Bd CF 5 v Sp CF 4...no side-support because it has been turned, but the Sp can recoil) With ‘Instant-Turning-To-Face’ the red player would have a third option:- ③ move the Blade into contact FIRST, turning the Spear, and THEN move the Auxiliaries in. (Bd CF 5 v Sp CF 4 -1 for the Ax flank attack, AND the Sp will be destroyed if it recoils) Soooo...CF 3 v 4, and destroyed if recoiled (10 chances out of 36 of a kill), or CF 5 v 4 (and only 2 chances out of 36 of a kill), or CF 5 v 3, and destroyed if recoiled (a whopping 26 chances out of 36 of a kill). I know what I would do if I was the red player! And if the blue player doesn’t like it, then he should have kept a reserve (even a Psiloi would do), and used its Threat Zone to prevent the Blade from charging the Spear’s flank. Here is an even better diagram to show the advantages of ‘Instantly-Turning-To-Face’:- Sp Sp
Kn Ps Ax
If the red player moves BOTH the Kn and Ps into contact, the Sp won’t turn because it’s being frontally engaged, so the poor lowly Ps has to do all the fighting, while the mighty Kn loses its ‘quick-kill’ and is relegated to be nothing more than a -1 penalty (but it will prevent recoiling). Having the Ps also engaging actually makes the Kn weaker!...they’d be better off charging on their own!Ah, but if the Kn attacks the Sp flank FIRST, turning them, and THEN the Ps moves in to hit the newly exposed Sp flank, the Kn will do all the fighting, and keeps its ‘quick-kill’, and it is the Ps that provides the -1 penalty...AND prevents recoiling (which won’t happen, as recoiling Sp are killed by Kn). As for the shifting Threat Zone...a staple cliché of just about every action movie is “We need a diversion!”... ...and that is exactly what ‘Instantly-Turning-To-Face’ provides. You hit an enemy flank FIRST, their attention is diverted and they turn instantly to meet this new threat, and the friendly element they were pinning is now free to move as it likes. What’s not to like? |
|
Just a reminder, that there are some who think that Stevies trick isnt working. (There was a big discussion about it.) The discussion is about the famous first sentence in the combat section stating, that combat always happens if the front edge of the attacker touches an enemy element.
Just to throw some more petrol on the fire 
, there is also the following to consider.
