|
|
Post by solal71 on Sept 23, 2021 17:51:44 GMT
 Here is the situation: a 4Ax (up) contacts a 4Bd already flanking a unit (an El in combat with a Cv). Does the 4Bd have to conform to the 4Ax or could it stays in place, being flanked itself? |
|
|
|
Post by Tony Aguilar on Sept 23, 2021 18:00:11 GMT
It turns to face the Ax.
|
|
|
|
Post by menacussecundus on Sept 23, 2021 18:02:23 GMT
The Bd has to turn to face the Ax (at the end of movement phase). Ax fights the overlapped Bd. (Overlapped) Elephant fights the Cv. The player with the Ax and El decides which combat to do first.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tony Aguilar on Sept 23, 2021 18:11:33 GMT
The player with the Ax and El decides which combat to do first. Because in the example shown the Ax moves into combat with Bd therefore must be the Ax and El bound. In future bounds it will be the phasing player's choice which order to do the combats in. |
|
|
|
Post by solal71 on Sept 23, 2021 18:20:50 GMT
Thank you both! I must admit, it was my take on it, but I have some tricky play partners... /-D
ps: It is always a blast to lurk at your videos on YT, Tony. Keep on the good work.
Solal
|
|
|
|
Post by Tony Aguilar on Sept 23, 2021 18:28:44 GMT
Thank you both! I must admit, it was my take on it, but I have some tricky play partners... /-D ps: It is always a blast to lurk at your videos on YT, Tony. Keep on the good work. Solal You are most welcome. Hopefully, you are Subscribed to my channel too. It doesn't cost you anything but it is very helpful with visibility and suggestions. |
|
cgd
Munifex
Posts: 21
|
Post by cgd on Sept 23, 2021 18:30:22 GMT
Solal argument started with me...
p. 10
"Immediately after the movement phase, elements contacted to flank or rear by an ennemy front edge turn to face the first ennemy to contact them *unless they are already in full front edge contact with an ennemy element*"
From my understanding, the blade is already in full front edge contact with the elephant flank, so does not turn to face, does it ?
|
|
|
|
Post by menacussecundus on Sept 23, 2021 18:53:22 GMT
Solal argument started with me... p. 10 "Immediately after the movement phase, elements contacted to flank or rear by an ennemy front edge turn to face the first ennemy to contact them *unless they are already in full front edge contact with an ennemy element*" From my understanding, the blade is already in full front edge contact with the elephant flank, so does not turn to face, does it ? Full front edge contact is usually taken to mean mutual front edge to front edge contact. It is only full front edge contact for the Bd in this instance because the element contacted is an El on a 40x40 base. If the enemy were Cv, Bd, Ax - or practically anything except El, Art or L or HCh - only part of the Bd's front edge would be in contact and the ambiguity wouldn't arise. It is possible that the intention was that elements in frontal contact with the side edge of certain types of enemy element (El, Art or Chariots) - or which have contacted the rear of any enemy - shouldn't have to turn to face if they are attacked. But that is not how most of the people I know play it. |
|
cgd
Munifex
Posts: 21
|
Post by cgd on Sept 23, 2021 19:50:19 GMT
I'm not saying my position is logical, but I'm still sticking to the wording. Please note my first reaction was the same as all you guys, but I was called as a referee, and reading the sentence, the doubt came.
On page 9, there is a mention of :
[...] (a) in full mutual front edge contact, (b) in full front edge to rear edge contact [...]
That lead me to think that there are different kind of full front edge contact, which could be mutual, or to rear edge (and thus, why not, to side edge).
I'm still dizzy...
|
|
|
|
Post by menacussecundus on Sept 23, 2021 20:31:31 GMT
I'm not saying my position is logical, but I'm still sticking to the wording. Please note my first reaction was the same as all you guys, but I was called as a referee, and reading the sentence, the doubt came. On page 9, there is a mention of : [...] (a) in full mutual front edge contact, (b) in full front edge to rear edge contact [...] That lead me to think that there are different kind of full front edge contact, which could be mutual, or to rear edge (and thus, why not, to side edge). I'm still dizzy... I see your point, cgd. But in that case what about the requirement that "moving a front edge into contact with the enemy always results in combat" (page 9)? How does the Ax participate, given that the Bd is not in combat and is only providing a tactical factor to the El v Cv combat? |
|
cgd
Munifex
Posts: 21
|
Post by cgd on Sept 23, 2021 20:55:41 GMT
I suppose that the point is that now, if the El wins the combat, the Bd , which would have to recoil, would be destroyed. There is actually a combat, a big melee mess up, and the Ax participate in that combat since it impact the result, preventing the recoil of the Bd. (I still not saying it is fair or historically accurate) I am still in favour to think the wording of the rule is in support to that position, even if the spirit is not. That being said, English is not my first language and maybe I am missing something.
|
|
|
|
Post by menacussecundus on Sept 23, 2021 21:30:25 GMT
In that case, the Ax would have an effect on the outcome of the combat, but not on the combat itself (because it does not provide a tactical factor).
|
|
cgd
Munifex
Posts: 21
|
Post by cgd on Sept 23, 2021 22:09:18 GMT
In that case, the Ax would have an effect on the outcome of the combat, but not on the combat itself (because it does not provide a tactical factor). Indeed ! |
|
|
|
Post by menacussecundus on Sept 23, 2021 22:15:47 GMT
In that case, the Ax would have an effect on the outcome of the combat, but not on the combat itself (because it does not provide a tactical factor). Indeed ! And consequently, the move into contact does not "result in combat", which the rules say it should. |
|
cgd
Munifex
Posts: 21
|
Post by cgd on Sept 23, 2021 23:16:20 GMT
You are right to that extent, but now, two ideas are raising.
First, I am not sure we could use it as a real proof, since the rules seem to not be consistent in that regard.
For exemple, after an element contacted the small face of a WWg, a second element contacts the flanks. Then, if that same flank is contacted by a third ennemy, it will neither fight nor bring a tactical factor, since only 1 overlap or flank contact is counted per flank. Thus that move into contact does not "result in combat", which the rules say it should, as you mentionned above. Nevertheless, the contact remains legal...
And second, maybe I am really tired, but a silly idea comes in mind.
P. 10, close combat, second sentence :
It occurs when an element moves into, or remains in, both front edge and front corner-to-corner contact with an ennemy element [...]
Please note that it does not specify with what the front edge should be in contact.
So, in our specific situation, I would assume the combat occurs, since the Ax has moved into both front edge and front corner-to-corner contact with the Bd.
That may look silly, but I cannot see anything that would forbid that.
What happens then ?
The Ax wins > the Bd recoils, and the ennemy is on is flank > the Bd is destroyed.
The Bd wins > the Ax recoils (destroyed on double) > the Bd stays on the flank of the El
Is anything in the rules preventing this to happen ? I do not find anything...
Maybe I am misleading and going in a so wrong position, but once again, I am just reading the rules and trying to apply them as they are written.
I would be glad to have any other comments to sort it out. |
|
