Threat Zone (again....) front edge... far edge...

Oh, boy! 
Because the "touches its far edge" refers to the whole enemy ELEMENT and any part of it, not just the FRONT EDGE of it.

I brought this up to the FAQ Group for clarification because of questions like this keep coming up from less experienced players (on here and on Facebook) that are not aware of how past games have been played at all conventions.

The play testers have assured me that is not what the author intended and added it to the FAQ at my behest. (Not to mention it would be extremely weird and fiddly.)

I do understand the FAQ ruling on this issue, but would like to warn players of a weird side-effect.

In this diagram it is the red player’s bound, and red elements 1 & 2 moved into contact with the blues.
Note that although blue A & B are shown as two elements, they could be a single 1 BW deep element.
However, in the resulting combat an equal ‘no effect’ outcome occurred.

                                                

In the following blue player's bound, blue Element-C would obviously like to ‘hard flank’ red Element-1.
But according to the FAQ ruling it cannot, because Blue-C is being touched by Red-2’s far-edge TZ.
Blue-C is somehow being threatened by Red-2, even though its left flank quite safe from attack,
and it can’t even see Red-2!
So Blue-C is stuck there, helpless, and can only move straight-back.

Now does anybody think this is at all realistic?…
…or is it merely an unfortunate side-effect caused by rule misinterpretation?
What happened to the first sentence of Contacting The Enemy on page 9, where it says:-
       “The general principle is that troops that would contact in real life do so in the game…”

This would not happen in HoTT (no X-Ray Threat Zones).
This would not happen in DBA 2.2 (no X-Ray Threat Zones).
It can only happen in DBA 3.0 if you apply DBA 2.2 rules to X-Ray TZ’s.

Perhaps Phil Barker (bless him) understood this, and in order to get the same effects in DBA 3.0
as you would get in DBA 2.2 and HoTT he had to slightly change the TZ wording to read as:-
         “An element or group which is at least partly within or whose front edge
          enters an enemy TZ or touches its far edge can move only…”

If you play by Phil Barker’s TZ rule as it is written, then the front-edge of Blue-C is NOT affected
by Red-2’s TZ, so it can ‘close-the-door’ on Red-1…just as it could in HoTT and DBA 2.2…
…and the problem is solved.

If you try to apply DBA 2.2 TZ rules to DBA 3.0, then expect to get some pretty weird effects.

Yes. First, though not a native speaker, your English is excellent. Second, this passage from the rules was unfortunately garbled in the later part of the writing process. The story is long and complex, but the odd wording is the result of us trying to correct a more severe error. We got it partly corrected.

So, the problem is not your capability with English... the problem is that this section is confusing.

Here is the threat zone wording from October 2013... before the events I just mentioned.

THREAT ZONE
The area 1 BW deep in front of any edge of a War Wagon or the front edge of any other element, or the area within 1 BW of any point of a camp, city or fort containing enemy is its Threat Zone (TZ). An element or group in, entering or touching the far edge of an enemy TZ can move only: (a) to advance to line up in contact with or towards such contact, or parallel opposite the front edge of 1 such element (or contact that camp, city or fort); or if a single element (b) straight back for the entire move, or (c) after combat; as an outcome move or to conform if still in contact.


Joe Collins

Yes, this is by design and on purpose.

It is my understanding that this is square with DBMM... though I am not a DBMM player.

Joe Collins

Actually Simon, I can see the reasoning behind all this.
Yes, it is daft, but I can understand why the FAQ Team have ruled as they did.

                                     

If Blue A & B were not there, or were destroyed, then Blue-C should be threatened and pinned.

Because of the new concept of ‘X-Ray Threat Zones’ in DBA 3.0, we have three choices:-
         a) Make Blue-C be pinned (which makes ‘closing-the-door’ on Red-1 impossible)…
         b) Let Blue-C be free to move (which means it won’t be pinned when nothing is in the way of Red-2)…
         c) Or introduce some rather complicated rules to individually cover these two separate situations.
Of these three options above, (a) is probably the simplest solution.

And it doesn't happen often.
If Blue-C were in two TZ’s, then it could choose whom it wishes to advance towards.
if Blue A & B were destroyed, and Red-1 pursued, then Blue-C could advance towards
Red-2 (who’s TZ it is in) and end up attacking Red-1 in the flank.
So it is quite rare.

I like to think of it as the local officer or clan leader becoming confused or over-cautious.
(In the heat of battle, there have been many examples of troops disobeying orders)

As for ‘X-Ray Threat Zones…oddly enough, I quite like them.
Imagine how unrealistic it would be to have the rear supporting rank of say Warbands or
Pikemen shifting sideways willy-nilly to boost an adjacent friendly element. Pikes fought
in strict formal 16 rank deep units, and Warbands wouldn’t have the discipline nor the
command and control to pull off such a move.

Again, I like to think of it as local leaders having their own minds and making their own decisions,
instead of just being radio-controlled robots that always do exactly what they are told.

Plus there are the morale effects to take into consideration…
…if I was desperately fighting in the front rank, and my mates behind me nipped-off somewhere else,
I’d probably be off with ‘em!

Would it be better if only the front edge being on the base width limit (ie at 40mm) restricted your movement to the usual TZ requirements. Being ‘at’ exactly 40mm with your side or rear edge would not then create this situation and we could still live with the X-Ray TZ approach…

A good point and highlights how difficult it is to create a ‘simple’ TZ rule which gives a answer that covers all the possible situations. If you make one correction to solve one issue, you just open the door to others, irrespective of whether you go with X-Ray, Flashlight or Rolling Carpet as the central tenet.

P