|
|
Post by kaiphranos on Nov 25, 2022 12:02:50 GMT
 Hi all, wanted to get some advice on a situation that came up in a game yesterday. My brother managed to get a group of chariots in between the board edge and a difficult hill. I had a unit up on the hill and wanted to come attack him in the flank. Problem is, my chariots are mounted on 60x80mm bases so they are longer than they are wide, and in the tight space there wasn't room to turn the contacted chariot without either putting it in the bad going or shoving the other end of the line off the board edge. We eventually agreed to just turn it and treat the chariot as though it were not in bad going for the purposes of this combat, but how would you have resolved this one? |
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Nov 25, 2022 12:29:25 GMT
I think I would have done what you did and continued as if the chariot were on a 40x40mm base. We can't penalise players for fielding nice models! Besides, you're already giving the enemy a larger flank target and at 40x40mm, you'll be destroyed on recoil.
I don't think this would sttract the -1 penalty for not conforming as turning to face is not conforming.
Cheers
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Nov 25, 2022 12:33:54 GMT
I’d just follow the page 10 Turing To Face rules:-
“Immediately after the movement phase, elements contacted to flank or rear by an enemy front edge
turn to face the first enemy element to contact them (unless they are already in full front edge contact
with another enemy element, or providing rear support) (see figure 14a).
Existing contacts are adjusted by moving the elements forward, back or the minimum sideways to maintain contact.”
So the Chariot contacted turns, and the others shuffle back (or possibly forwards) to make room...
...but only those that absolutely need to shuffle out of the way to make room do so.
In other words, I'd have the Chariot closest to the hill turning, the Chariot in the middle shuffling
sideways towards the table-edge without changing its facing, and the last Chariot on the table-edge
moving back (or forwards) without changing its facing to make room for the middle Chariot.
As for the Chariot in the rear behind the middle Chariot, I'd have that 'maintaining contact'
directly behind the middle Chariot by also shuffling sideways with it (which won't leave room
for the end Chariot to move back, so it has to move forwards, as that is the 'minimum move').
|
|
|
|
Post by kaiphranos on Nov 25, 2022 13:10:47 GMT
Hmm, would that apply, though? It seems to reference "existing contacts" and neither of the other chariots is in contact with the enemy. (If they were, I feel like this solution would be even messier - would the combatants on the end be forced to break off to make room?) Either way, this seems like it would be a pretty substantial series of adjustments - maybe it would easier to just move the hill backwards a smidgen to make room?  |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Nov 25, 2022 13:18:45 GMT
“An earthquake has shifted the hill!”  |
|
|
|
Post by Baldie on Nov 25, 2022 14:10:15 GMT
I would just sit a 40mm x 40mm base on the board until such time the chariot could fit again.
Or model your chariots doing a wheelie!
|
|
|
|
Post by decebalus on Mar 1, 2023 10:55:19 GMT
I am a big supporter of deeper bases in 28mm. They look better without having a wider frontage. fanaticus.boards.net/thread/1855/deeper-basing-28mmThere are two solutions for your problem. a) Play as if your bases have the normal depth. So use a stand-in base or ignore the rear end in difficult situations. In your situation, where other elements are based "normal" that seems to be the best solution. b) Play the real depth you are using. It changes the game minimal, but if you are not playing tournaments ist doesnt matter. In your case, you would be hemapered by your deeper base. This is the best solution when all your elements (of on etype) use a different depth. |
|
