|
|
Post by Brian Ború on Jul 8, 2023 16:22:38 GMT
Ah…I’m having trouble telling which way the column is facing… Forgive me Brian, but the front 3 figures of the Horde seem to be fighting the rear 3 Horde figures!…going by the way that bloke on the right is swinging his axe… Then there is all the turning-to-face considerations to take into account. But Menacussecundus is right: legal contact is by front corners touching only. (Move over in the naughty corner to make room for me then…ha, ha, ha!  )Sorry, my fault, the picture is a bit blurred... |
|
|
|
Post by menacussecundus on Jul 8, 2023 16:24:04 GMT
The Ax has made a legal contact on the flank of the Wb . Now, what about the Turning to face rule? I think the warband (as it doesn’t give rear support) turns to face the left Ax. But in order to make legal contact, the Hd and the Ax on the road are being pushed along the road, so that finally the Wb and the left Ax face each other, right? No. If the Ax makes front corner to front corner contact with the Wb, it doesn't touch the Hd and the Wb can simply turn to face. (Unless the Hd and Wb are back to back.) |
|
|
|
Post by Les1964 on Jul 8, 2023 16:24:19 GMT
The Ax has made a legal contact on the flank of the Wb . Has it? Looks like front corner to rear corner to me. However, if it had contacted the flank of the Wb, the Wb would turn to face (and the Hd wouldn't suffer a -1 for being flanked). I think the base with the white stone and 6 figures is the Hd . |
|
|
|
Post by menacussecundus on Jul 8, 2023 16:33:16 GMT
Has it? Looks like front corner to rear corner to me. However, if it had contacted the flank of the Wb, the Wb would turn to face (and the Hd wouldn't suffer a -1 for being flanked). I think the base with the white stone and 6 figures is the Hd . I agree. But in the first photo, it is the leading element in the column with the Wb behind it. The flanking Ax's front corners are half way along the edge of the Hd and touching the rear corner of the Wb. (Unless the Hd and Wb are back to back, which I don't think they are.) |
|
|
|
Post by Brian Ború on Jul 8, 2023 18:11:05 GMT
Well, a bit more thinking and rereading the rules concerning Moving into contact now lead me to this:
The Ax in picture one which is contacting both flanks of the Wb and the Horde has made illegal contact. So this "move does not happen."
Legal contact could have achieved only by full rear to rear or front corner to front corner contact, depending on the Ax's starting point.
|
|
|
|
Post by menacussecundus on Jul 8, 2023 19:51:34 GMT
Well, a bit more thinking and rereading the rules concerning Moving into contact now lead me to this: The Ax in picture one which is contacting both flanks of the Wb and the Horde has made illegal contact. So this "move does not happen." Legal contact could have achieved only by full rear to rear or front corner to front corner contact, depending on the Ax's starting point. Exactly. The flanking Ax would need to contact either the Hd's front corner or the Wb's front corner with its own front corner for the move to be allowed. |
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Jul 9, 2023 6:53:59 GMT
(Move over in the naughty corner to make room for me then…ha, ha, ha! ) Now stevie, you know full well that there is a marble throne in the naughty corner with your name carved into it!  Jim |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Jul 9, 2023 10:37:43 GMT
There is always room for one more in the naughty corner Jim… |
|
|
|
Post by Les1964 on Jul 9, 2023 10:55:01 GMT
Well, a bit more thinking and rereading the rules concerning Moving into contact now lead me to this: The Ax in picture one which is contacting both flanks of the Wb and the Horde has made illegal contact. So this "move does not happen." Legal contact could have achieved only by full rear to rear or front corner to front corner contact, depending on the Ax's starting point. Exactly. The flanking Ax would need to contact either the Hd's front corner or the Wb's front corner with its own front corner for the move to be allowed. Think I confused myself , i'll go on the naughty step as well .  |
|
|
|
Post by Brian Ború on Jul 10, 2023 15:03:34 GMT
Following on from another thread, what are the rule interpretations that cause the most difficulties/need to reference?
For me, it's the interpenetration via tactical move/recoil. I am never confident that I've remembered these right, so constantly have to refer back to the rules.
In order to get these rules right, I tried to sum them up (as an addition to the QRS of the Society of Ancients). It looks like this: Interpenetration Advancing through friends ‐ only when starting and ending lined up. Any mounted through Ps only, Ps through any friendly units. Recoiling through friends - only when facing the same direction and enough clear space beyond. Only Bd through Bd or Sp, and Pk or Bw through Bd, any mounted through any friends except El, Hd, Pk and Ps through any except Ps. Others will be pushed back. Fleeing ‐ like advancing, but may start at least partly lined up. Any suggestions? |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Jul 10, 2023 18:03:39 GMT
That’s a good summing up Brian. My own version is →in here |
|
|
|
Post by Brian Ború on Aug 2, 2023 9:02:07 GMT
Group forming a column
The rules state: A group move can include reducing frontage to form such a
column for this or any other purpose. The leading element moves forward,
then others successively join behind it, moving as if by single element moves.
No element can end with its front edge further to its original rear.
In an exciting battle with yorkist I deployed my Teutonic order in two lines,
infantry in front, mounted behind. To attack his Early Polish on his right wing
with my heavy cavalry, I formed a column of my knights and LH by turning
them 90° to the left, the first unit moving only a little bit, so that the rest could
easily fall in behind, because I had to go around a big wood.
Now, what do you think? Does this conform to the rules, saying:
The leading element moves forward?
I think: yes it does, because the order "Alle mir nach!" or "Follow me" is easy
to understand and quite easy to perform.
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Aug 2, 2023 9:49:51 GMT
Ah…this is a tricky one.
Technically, I would say that according to the rules, the move described by Brian is not possible because:-
① the leading element is not moving straight forwards…it’s changing its facing by turning 90°.
② and if it did make such a move, then part of it’s front-edge would end up behind it’s starting line.
I think the confusion is caused by the “No element can end with its front edge further to its original rear”.
I take this to mean the front-edge’s original rear…not the original rear-edge of the element.
Of course, it could move straight forwards, then turn, provided its front-edge does not end up behind the
front-edge's original starting line, all in a single move, with the other elements following doing the same.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brian Ború on Aug 2, 2023 10:16:11 GMT
Ah…this is a tricky one. Technically, I would say that according to the rules, the move described by Brian is not possible because:- ① the leading element is not moving straight forwards…it’s changing its facing by turning 90°. ② and if it did make such a move, then part of it’s front-edge would end up behind it’s starting line. I think the confusion is caused by the “No element can end with its front edge further to its original rear”. I take this to mean the front-edge’s original rear…not the original rear-edge of the element. Of course, it could move straight forwards, then turn, provided its front-edge does not end up behind the front-edge's original starting line, all in a single move, with the other elements following doing the same. So instead of an easy manœuver we have to wind like a snake or a shyster to conform to the rules? Note: the front-edge doesn’t fall back behind the starting line if I turn around the front left corner. |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Aug 2, 2023 11:06:34 GMT
…yes, but that is a single element pivoting or wheeling on a stationary front corner, not a 90° turn on the spot. And I didn’t write the rules…  |
|
)
