|
|
Post by barritus on Jul 7, 2021 6:04:04 GMT
Hi
Hoping someone can answer this.
The other day a friend and I played a game of DBA24. At one point there were two enemy El ( side by side in a line) coming towards me. I then managed a flank contact with a Cv on the left-most EL which then had to turn to face. In doing so its rear edge was now up against the righthand El's side edge.
My Cv then scored a 6-1 leading to the El having to recoil.
So....are both enemy elephants destroyed due to the recoil or as the recoiling El was touching the others base and had no room to start its recoil only it was destroyed?
I thought both were destroyed at the time but looking at it now I think only the reciler should have gone to the great savannah in the sky....
|
|
|
|
Post by Baldie on Jul 7, 2021 6:16:28 GMT
I think it is just the recoiler, if there had been a mm worth of space so it could start a recoil both would be used for the post match BBQ.
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Jul 7, 2021 7:04:00 GMT
Page 12, forth paragraph, Recoiling says:-
“If the recoiling element is Elephants, all friends or enemy met (that are not in a BUA or camp) are destroyed.”
The latest 2020 FAQ expands on this with:-
“Q: If my Elephants receive a recoil result and aren’t “flanked” or “reared” do they meet and
destroy all elements in their recoil path?
A: In most cases, yes. Elements in BUA and Camps are exceptions to this.
Elements in these terrain features usually aren’t destroyed unless they are other Elephants.”
This raises the question of what does ‘met’ mean…which is also answered by the latest 2020 FAQ:-
“Q: The rules say that Elephants destroy elements “met”. Does this mean elements they just touch?
A: No. The Elephant has to actually enter the area occupied by another to destroy it.
Touching doesn’t count as “meeting” in this case.”
So it looks like just the elephant met is destroyed, not the recoiling elephant.
(Justification?…elephants trumpeting in distress will cause other elephants to panic and stampede) 🐘
Note that Page 12, fifth paragraph, recoiling says:-
“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, an enemy, or a city, fort or camp,
ends its move there (see figure 19b).
An element already in such contact with any of these cannot recoil and is destroyed instead .”
…well an elephant CAN pass through any friends…by trampling and destroying them!
So friendly or enemy elements are not an obstacle to recoiling elephants.
|
|
|
|
Post by menacussecundus on Jul 7, 2021 7:31:32 GMT
Page 12, forth paragraph, Recoiling says:- “If the recoiling element is Elephants, all friends or enemy met (that are not in a BUA or camp) are destroyed.” The latest 2020 FAQ expands on this with:- “Q: If my Elephants receive a recoil result and aren’t “flanked” or “reared” do they meet and destroy all elements in their recoil path? A: In most cases, yes. Elements in BUA and Camps are exceptions to this. Elements in these terrain features usually aren’t destroyed unless they are other Elephants.” This raises the question of what does ‘ met’ mean…which is also answered by the latest 2020 FAQ:- “Q: The rules say that Elephants destroy elements “met”. Does this mean elements they just touch? A: No. The Elephant has to actually enter the area occupied by another to destroy it. Touching doesn’t count as “meeting” in this case.” So it looks like just the elephant met is destroyed, not the recoiling elephant. (Justification?…elephants trumpeting in distress will cause other elephants to panic and stampede) 🐘 I think most people play it that the defeated El is unable to start its recoil and is therefore destroyed, while the one blocking its recoil survives i.e. as Baldie said earlier. |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Jul 7, 2021 7:35:58 GMT
Oops...slow typing by me...I missed your reply.
See my additional edit above.
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Jul 7, 2021 8:16:21 GMT
Just to make things absolutely clear, see the following example:-
↓
Cv
El
Bd
When the Elephant recoils from the blue Cv, is it destroyed because it has no room to move back?
No, because Page 12, forth paragraph, Recoiling says:-
“If the recoiling element is Elephants, all friends or enemy met (that are not in a BUA or camp) are destroyed.”
(i.e. those behind a recoiling elephant are trampled and lost…not the recoiling elephant with no room to move)
Replace the Bd with another friendly red element facing in a different direction and the same rule will apply.
LATER EDIT
Ah, but Page 12, forth paragraph, Recoiling also goes on to say:-
"If 2 (recoiling) Elephants elements meet, both are destroyed."
So I was wrong and Barritus in his first post was right...
...it was correct to remove two elephants.
NOT because the recoiling elephant had no room to recoil,
but because a recoiling elephant met another elephant.
|
|
|
|
Post by barritus on Jul 7, 2021 8:48:15 GMT
Thx all for the replies. However I'm still confused as to the correct outcome. It seems to me we have a number of competing issues.
1. El meeting others trample them.
2. 'If 2 Elephants meet, both are destroyed'.
3.'An element already in such contact[sic rear edge is contacting an element it can't pass thro or push back] is destroyed instead.
So in point 1 - El kills the El behind it.
In point 2 - both El are destroyed.
In point 3 - the recoiling element has no room to recoil as already touching the element behind (in my example that element is another El's base at right angles to the recoiling El so presumably can't push them back) so it dies as can't start its recoil.
From the above perhaps point 2 is correct after all (??) Given PB's perchant for the simple ( even if Barkerese sometimes gets in the way) perhaps it was put in to include situations like this???
Edit. Oh thx Stevie our last replies crossed as it were.
|
|
|
|
Post by arnopov on Jul 7, 2021 8:53:05 GMT
A recurrent topic. fanaticus.boards.net/thread/2648/elephant-recoilI don't think it has been well resolved, as the FAQ is not quite as clear as it could be. At the heart of the issue is which mechanism takes priority: 1/ Elephant squishing everything in their recoil path (with mutual squish if other Elephants) 2/ Elephants being prevented from recoiling in the first place, as any normal troops. The rule doesn't say which one takes priority. I thought that the FAQ was clear (1 takes priority), but other interpret differently, notably Tony. I often try to use recoiling El as an aggressive tactic, but always check first what the local ruling is. |
|
|
|
Post by menacussecundus on Jul 7, 2021 9:06:46 GMT
The alternative to stevie's reading is that if an element is already in contact with another element, it doesn't "meet" it when it recoils. The coming together has already occurred.
Drawing on the final sentence of the section on recoiling or being pushed back, the El in the example is already in such contact. It cannot recoil and is destroyed instead. (And because it doesn't recoil, it doesn't "meet" the second El, which therefore survives.)
|
|
|
|
Post by Tony Aguilar on Jul 7, 2021 9:44:25 GMT
The alternative to stevie's reading is that if an element is already in contact with another element, it doesn't "meet" it when it recoils. The coming together has already occurred. Drawing on the final sentence of the section on recoiling or being pushed back, the El in the example is already in such contact. It cannot recoil and is destroyed instead. (And because it doesn't recoil, it doesn't "meet" the second El, which therefore survives.) This is exactly how we play and the reasoning why we do it that way. |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Jul 7, 2021 9:45:49 GMT
Good points by Arnopov and Menacussecundus…however:-
What does ‘met’ or ‘meet’ mean?
If I paraphrase the FAQ quote, ’met’ means:-
Trying to enter another element…
Trying to occupy the same space as another element…
Trying to pass through another element…
Trying to penetrate another element…
...and so on.
If we take Menacussecundus’ interpretation, then elephants can NEVER trample those behind them,
even when these are facing in the same direction, because they will ALWAYS not have room to recoil
when someone has a front-edge touching the elephant’s rear-edge, and it will ALWAYS be the recoiling
elephant that gets destroyed (or the elephant pushes back those behind them...which again means they
can never trample those behind, making the elephant trampling rule completely redundant).
Surely that can’t be right.
I think that Page 12, paragraph 4, Recoiling, is pretty clear:-
If the recoiling element is Elephants, all friends or enemy ‘met’ (i.e. penetrated) are destroyed.
If 2 Elephant elements meet (i.e. one is penetrated), both are destroyed.
Surviving elephants finish their recoil (so could go on to penetrate and trample others).
…and it then goes to to describe what happens when other non-elephants recoil.
|
|
|
|
Post by ronisan on Jul 7, 2021 11:00:15 GMT
Hi guys,
I'm not happy with the interpretation of 'meet'!
The last paragraph of the chapter "Recoiling or being pushed back" says:
"A recoiling or pushed back element whose rear edge or rear corner meets terrain it cannot enter, ..."
So for me 'meeting' and 'not enter' seems to be equal to 'touching' - isn't it?
So - shouldn't both elephants be destroyed? -> "If two elephants meet, both are destroyed" (?)
Cheers
Ronald
|
|
|
|
Post by Tony Aguilar on Jul 7, 2021 12:28:43 GMT
I MAY make a video at some point (when I get a chance) with/without Mitch illustrating how we play as the written word doesn't do the desired effect especially with these discussions that go round and round.
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Jul 7, 2021 14:50:59 GMT
Fine Tony.  I’ll be interested in the reasoning why the Blade is destroyed by the recoiling Elephant in this picture:-  …because “If the recoiling element is Elephants, all friends or enemy met are destroyed.” And once the Blade is destroyed, it’s no longer there to be an obstacle to the recoiling Elephant. But the Blade is not destroyed by the recoiling Elephant in this picture, but the Elephant is instead:-  …because “If the recoiling element is Elephants, all friends or enemy met are destroyed.” And once the Blade is destroyed, it’s no longer there to be an obstacle to the recoiling Elephant. (Elephants don’t recoil like other troops do…they have their own special recoiling rules) |
|
|
|
Post by menacussecundus on Jul 7, 2021 15:12:47 GMT
Fine Tony. I’ll be interested in the reasoning why the Blade is destroyed by the recoiling Elephant in this picture:- …because “If the recoiling element is Elephants, all friends or enemy met are destroyed.” And once the Blade is destroyed, it’s no longer there to be an obstacle to the recoiling Elephant. But the Blade is not destroyed by the recoiling Elephant in this picture, but the Elephant is instead:- …because “If the recoiling element is Elephants, all friends or enemy met are destroyed.” And once the Blade is destroyed, it’s no longer there to be an obstacle to the recoiling Elephant. (Elephants don’t recoil like other troops do…they have their own special recoiling rules)With respect - as they say - phrasing the question in that way prejudges - and hence prejudices - the answer. The real question is "Is the Bd in diagram 1 destroyed if the El loses the combat but isn't doubled?" |
|
