|
|
Post by Brian Ború on Jul 22, 2023 12:46:08 GMT
O.k., we may argue touching is not entering. (Which is a bit surreal in the midst of battle, with men and beasts running to and fro.)
And yet the knights' front edge still touches the far end of the second spears TZ in one point. Right?
|
|
|
|
Post by menacussecundus on Jul 22, 2023 13:16:20 GMT
O.k., we may argue touching is not entering. (Which is a bit surreal in the midst of battle, with men and beasts running to and fro.) And yet the knights' front edge still touches the far end of the second spears TZ in one point. Right? Now we're into the metaphysics of whether or not a corner is an edge. True, the corner is formed where the two edges meet, but most people play it that the corner doesn't count as part of the edge. Not exactly on point, but see this extract from the latest FAQ; the front corner doesn't count as the front edge: "Q: I am moving a line of Spears as a group. I can just barely contact the rear of a single enemy Cav element in good going with the corner of my Spear line. Does it have to conform? A: No. You must stop short. To force the Cav to conform you must contact it with your front edge in most cases... not your corner. The only exception is when contact is prevented by part-element spacing between enemy elements or physically blocked by elements, terrain or a table edge." (My emphasis.) Similarly, if an element's maximum move brings it into just front corner to front corner contact with an enemy element, there is no free slide to conform. |
|
|
|
Post by vodnik on Jul 22, 2023 15:43:00 GMT
... attacking a column on the flank is a serious mistake that non-players can use as a blunder. It is the Attackers move, so the target elements must react according the rules...
|
|
|
|
Post by Brian Ború on Jul 22, 2023 17:11:22 GMT
O.k., we may argue touching is not entering. (Which is a bit surreal in the midst of battle, with men and beasts running to and fro.) And yet the knights' front edge still touches the far end of the second spears TZ in one point. Right? Now we're into the metaphysics of whether or not a corner is an edge. True, the corner is formed where the two edges meet, but most people play it that the corner doesn't count as part of the edge. Not exactly on point, but see this extract from the latest FAQ; the front corner doesn't count as the front edge: "Q: I am moving a line of Spears as a group. I can just barely contact the rear of a single enemy Cav element in good going with the corner of my Spear line. Does it have to conform? A: No. You must stop short. To force the Cav to conform you must contact it with your front edge in most cases... not your corner. The only exception is when contact is prevented by part-element spacing between enemy elements or physically blocked by elements, terrain or a table edge." (My emphasis.) Similarly, if an element's maximum move brings it into just front corner to front corner contact with an enemy element, there is no free slide to conform. Well, menacussecundus, I get your point, but I must insist: First, the starting point is certainly part of the line, that's common sense, not metaphysics.And if Phil Barker meant something else, he should have mentioned it or stated it clearly. Second, your example from the FAQs doesn't fit at all to our example, because it is all about elements contacting each other, and it's not about touching TZs. Third, it stands to reason that masses of enemy foot and/or cavalry who meet at an angle of 90°, are very much aware of each other, and will move accordingly, especially when so many of them are only a biscuit's toss away from each other. So, I still cling to my interpretation of PB's rules about threat zones. Why? Because it leads to more convincing results. And I do not only love to take the part of the advocatus diaboli, but in order to have a fun and fair game we certainly need to clarify the questionable points... So, in order to solve this problem in future rule versions, it might be better to redefine the borders of threat zones somehow... |
|
|
|
Post by menacussecundus on Jul 22, 2023 18:11:18 GMT
Well, I get your point, but I must insist: First, the starting point is certainly part of the line, that's common sense. And if Phil Barker meant something else, he should have mentioned it or stated it clearly. Second, your example from the FAQs doesn't fit at all to our example, because it is all about elements contacting each other, and it's not about touching TZs. Third, it stands to reason that masses of enemy foot and/or cavalry who meet at an angle of 90°, are very much aware of each other, and will move accordingly, especially when so many of them are only a biscuit's toss away from each other. So, I still cling to my interpretation of PB's rules about threat zones. Why? I do not only love to take the part of the advocatus diaboli, but in order to have a fun and fair game we certainly need to clarify the questionable points... Very well, let me try another approach. If a corner is treated as being part of an edge, who decides which edge? (And where in the rules is this specified?) Taking the example in your photograph, is the Sp in close combat with the Ax or with the Kn which has also contacted its front edge if that is how corners are being treated? If the Ax were not there and the Kn had moved into the position shown, would the Sp turn to face (as per page 10 of the rules) or would the Kn, having contacted the front edge of the Sp (the corner), use its free slide of up to one Base Width to conform to the Sp's front edge (as per page 9)? Now look at fig 16(c). If Ps Y gets a recoil result, does it recoil or is it destroyed because Ax B's front corner - and therefore, by your reading, its front edge - is in contact with Y's side edge? Cling to your interpretation by all means, you have as much right to be wrong as the next man. And in this case, I am the next man. |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Jul 22, 2023 20:32:16 GMT
I think I can help to clarify the situation with the following diagram:-
▄
▄ ▄ ▄
The centre red unit is inside the blue unit's TZ, and is under it’s influence.
If ‘touching’ a TZ side-edge mattered, then the two outer red units would also be affected.
They couldn’t move off to somewhere else, or even attack the blue unit in the flank…
…which is absurd.
DBA is a set of rules trying to simulate real-world events, albeit abstractly.
And sometimes having figures glued to bases causes weird unwanted effects,
which need to be compensated for in order to get those real-world events.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brian Ború on Jul 22, 2023 21:30:58 GMT
Well, I get your point, but I must insist: First, the starting point is certainly part of the line, that's common sense. And if Phil Barker meant something else, he should have mentioned it or stated it clearly. ... So, I still cling to my interpretation of PB's rules about threat zones. Why? I do not only love to take the part of the advocatus diaboli, but in order to have a fun and fair game we certainly need to clarify the questionable points... Very well, let me try another approach. If a corner is treated as being part of an edge, who decides which edge? (And where in the rules is this specified?) Taking the example in your photograph, is the Sp in close combat with the Ax or with the Kn which has also contacted its front edge if that is how corners are being treated? If the Ax were not there and the Kn had moved into the position shown, would the Sp turn to face (as per page 10 of the rules) or would the Kn, having contacted the front edge of the Sp (the corner), use its free slide of up to one Base Width to conform to the Sp's front edge (as per page 9)? Now look at fig 16(c). If Ps Y gets a recoil result, does it recoil or is it destroyed because Ax B's front corner - and therefore, by your reading, its front edge - is in contact with Y's side edge? Cling to your interpretation by all means, you have as much right to be wrong as the next man. And in this case, I am the next man. Ah, that's much better. Your string of examples shows the real problem: The rules differentiate (without stating it clearly) between (fully or partly) touching edges and touching corners. In this way they assumethat a corner is not a part of an edge. Let's take another example.  Both units touch the Barker marker, so they do not enter each others TZ. But do their TZs touch? Depending on where you put the marker, one unit's far edge of its threat zone touches the other units front edge with its corner only. In the picture the far right corner of the TZ of the red knights touches the front edge of the white knights. Taking into account PB's assumption that a corner is no part of the edge, now even I have to admit that the TZ's far edges and the front edges don't touch.  Sometimes I think I'd rather read Hegel than the purple book... |
|
|
|
Post by Brian Ború on Jul 24, 2023 8:18:43 GMT
More flank attacks:  A column of Early Polish facing left (2xKn, 3xSp, 3xBw) are being attacked by Teutonic Order units: 1xLH (above) and 2xKn (bottom). The two Knights contacted first, then the LH. What happens? |
|
|
|
Post by Les1964 on Jul 24, 2023 8:54:08 GMT
"A column of Early Polish facing left (2xKn, 3xSp, 3xBw) are being attacked
by Teutonic Order units: 1xLH (above) and 2xKn (bottom). The two Knights
contacted first, then the LH.
What happens ?"
1) The left hand Kn has made illegal contact on the Sp element . It would need to contact the front Sp element in front corner to front coner to make it legal , then the Sp elements would turn to face .
2) The 2 Bw would turn to face the Kn .
3) The Kn contacted by the Lh would turn to face , with the other Kn moving the minium distance to allow it to turn .
|
|
|
|
Post by menacussecundus on Jul 24, 2023 9:04:21 GMT
I would say that, first of all, you need to have the left-hand Teutonic Kn make legal contact. It should be front corner to front corner with the Sp rather than front corner to rear corner, although I suppose it's okay as part of a group where the right-hand element has made legal contact.
If the Teutonic Kn were slightly to their right - so the left-hand one makes front corner to front corner contact - then the second and third Sp turn to face the left-hand Teutonic Kn, the front 2 Bw turn to face the other one, the Kn and the first Sp turn to face the LH and the front and rear elements stay where they are.
But as shown, I think it is just the second Polish Kn and the first Sp who turn to face the LH and the first two Bw turn to face the right-hand Teutonic Kn. The front Kn moves forward to allow the rear Kn and first Sp to move and turn to face. The rear Bw and the second and third Sp stay where they are.
Edit: I've just seen that Les1964 take different views on whether or not the move by the left-hand Kn is legal. I suspect that he is probably correct.
|
|
|
|
Post by menacussecundus on Jul 24, 2023 9:18:50 GMT
"A column of Early Polish facing left (2xKn, 3xSp, 3xBw) are being attacked
by Teutonic Order units: 1xLH (above) and 2xKn (bottom). The two Knights
contacted first, then the LH.
What happens ?"1) The left hand Kn has made illegal contact on the Sp element . It would need to contact the front Sp element in front corner to front coner to make it legal , then the Sp elements would turn to face . 2) The 2 Bw would turn to face the Kn . 3) The Kn contacted by the Lh would turn to face , with the other Kn moving the minium distance to allow it to turn . If the Teutonic Kn move as a group and make legal (front corner to front corner) contact with the first of the Sp, then the first two Sp turn to face the left-hand Kn, The third Sp and the Bw are moved back. The third Sp ends in front corner to front corner contact with the right-hand Kn and it and the first Bw turn to face. The rear two Bw are moved back. |
|
|
|
Post by Brian Ború on Jul 24, 2023 9:39:42 GMT
Restart. Legal contact:  Outcome:  Right? |
|
|
|
Post by Brian Ború on Jul 24, 2023 9:50:03 GMT
Another one. A variation:  Again the knights of the Teutonic Order attack first. What happens now? |
|
|
|
Post by kaiphranos on Jul 24, 2023 10:24:31 GMT
At what point will the Poles learn to stop marching these long columns down roads?  |
|
|
|
Post by menacussecundus on Jul 24, 2023 14:23:01 GMT
Restart. Legal contact: Outcome: Right? I believe so. |
|
Sometimes I think I'd rather read Hegel than the purple book...
