|
Post by genoansteel on Dec 14, 2016 7:16:48 GMT
Hi, Just checking if this is correct A line of 3 Sp moves south into left flank contact with a column of Lh, the center Sp making the actual contact. Lh column turns north to face, but since there is not enough room, it pushes ONLY the center Sp northwards Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by bob on Dec 14, 2016 20:01:28 GMT
There are no 3Sp in DBA 3, so lets say it is 3Pk making the attack. There is a hole in the rules that does not cover what happens when an element hit in the flank does not have enough room to turn, as there was in 2.2 DBA 3 " 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. Any existing contacts are adjusted by moving the elements forward, back or the minimum distance sideways to maintain contact. If an element so contacts the flanks of two enemy elements, both these turn to face it if the first must, the second moving to behind the first. On the rare occasions that a third element is contacted, it is pushed back (p.9) to make room for the others to turn."
DBA 2.2 "Elements not in mutual front edge contact with an enemy element but contacted to flank or rear by an enemy front edge turn to face the first to so contact at the end of the movement phase, the contactor making room. If an element so contacts the flanks of 2 enemy elements, both these turn, the 2nd moving to behind the 1st. A 3rd element is pushed back clear."
"Contactor making room"
Maybe this sentence in 3.0 is the substitute for the above statement in 2
"Any existing contacts are adjusted by moving the elements forward, back or the minimum distance sideways to maintain contact."
But who moves, the contactor or the contactee?
In the example above, only the contractor can move, and I would play it be as shown.
|
|
|
Post by Tony Aguilar on Dec 14, 2016 20:27:09 GMT
I agree Bob and that is how I would play it.
|
|
|
Post by genoansteel on Dec 15, 2016 1:07:03 GMT
Thanks for the replies. BTW, when I wrote “3 Sp”, I meant 3xSp not 3Sp. Sorry for the confusion.
My group transitioned from 2.2, so we remember the “Contacter making room” part, but couldn’t find it in 3.0. There was some discussion on whether Ax(B) should slide southwards, but in the end we decided to defer back to 2.2 Thanks again
|
|
|
Post by Dangun on Dec 16, 2016 6:53:27 GMT
Who knows what Barker intended?
But that result - having the LH column turn in formation and knock the middle spear out of its group - looks RIDICULOUS.
Surely its the unintended consequences of something??
I would guess its the unintended consequences of the LH getting rear support rule, and an edit due to someone's dissatisfaction with how pike columns reacted to getting hit in the side.
|
|
|
Post by bob on Dec 17, 2016 16:49:26 GMT
Even after the spear element backs up to make room for the Lighthorse to turn and face, the light horse is still overlapped by the other two spear elements. The spear fights at +4 (unless a general), it loses nothing because side support is only against foot. The Lighthorse element ends up as is zero, but plus one for second rank. Moreover the Lighthorse can Neither recoil nor flee.
|
|
|
Post by Dangun on Dec 20, 2016 2:32:38 GMT
Even after the spear element backs up to make room for the Lighthorse to turn and face, the light horse is still overlapped by the other two spear elements. The combat might be bad for the LH. But the second LH is not engaged in combat AND the pike cannot follow up as a group after the first LH dies. So the attacking group suffers as a result of some silly unintended consequence of the mysterious LH rear support.
|
|
|
Post by sheffmark on Dec 20, 2016 11:19:00 GMT
Not got my rules with me at present but is the Sp contact legal? It's not contacting corner to corner, though can't remember if you need to do this on a flank?
Why is it the centre Sp that's making the actual contact? (The right hand Sp is making more contact with the front LH than the centre Sp.)
Also could the front LH move to contact the right hand Sp and the rear most one contact the middle Sp, as both Sp contacted both LH at the same time and the front LH is in the TZ of both Sp so could move to contact either? Is it because the LH provide rear support?
What if the contact was by right corner of the middle Sp to the right front corner of the rear most LH? Would that result in two individual combats?
|
|
Fab
Munifex
Posts: 12
|
Post by Fab on Dec 20, 2016 13:54:53 GMT
I agree with Dangun.
The attacking line of Spear (the most important type of group in DBA) at combat is no longer a line/group : this is not acceptable as the Spears lose the side support vs. foot and no longer move as a group.
IMHO it's better to follow the DBA 2.2 solution.
Cheers Fab
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Dec 20, 2016 14:10:35 GMT
I agree with Dangun. The attacking line of Spear (the most important type of group in DBA) at combat is no longer a line/group : this is not acceptable as the Spears lose the side support vs. foot and no longer move as a group. IMHO it's better to follow the DBA 2.2 solution. Cheers Fab You would be correct if the attacking group were 4Sp, but the original poster used 3Sp in his example. Page 11, Flank Support Factors, last sentence. “Fast” elements neither give nor receive flank support.
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Dec 20, 2016 14:32:17 GMT
In that example, the LH would be better positioned echeloned back so its TZ covers the flank of his own infantry. Failing a combat result, LH fighting Sp would recoil or worse, flee.
The LH would be better employed turning the flank of the enemy spear and harrassing its rear.
|
|
Fab
Munifex
Posts: 12
|
Post by Fab on Dec 20, 2016 17:02:26 GMT
You would be correct if the attacking group were 4Sp, but the original poster used 3Sp in his example. Page 11, Flank Support Factors, last sentence. “Fast” elements neither give nor receive flank support. Right. But my opinion does not change. It's abnormal that a group, who made a coordinated attack on an enemy flank, is no longer a group because of its maneuver. The fact that a group of 4Sp loses also the flank support is only an aggravating factor.
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Dec 20, 2016 18:16:12 GMT
You would be correct if the attacking group were 4Sp, but the original poster used 3Sp in his example. Page 11, Flank Support Factors, last sentence. “Fast” elements neither give nor receive flank support. Right. But my opinion does not change. It's abnormal that a group, who made a coordinated attack on an enemy flank, is no longer a group because of its maneuver. The fact that a group of 4Sp loses also the flank support is only an aggravating factor.
I totally agree. Using your example of 4Sp, as gentlemen gamers we would look to find a better solution to maintain group integrity.
More than likely, we would leave the position as is exampled in the first image and simply calculate the factors as if the LH column had turned to face the group. In the diagrams section, 13c comes closest to this kind of situation. If the LH manages to recoil the central Sp, then the column would be adjusted to look like image two.
The most likely result would have the head of the LH column destroyed with the second LH turned toward the group of spear leaving 10mm of breathing space between.
|
|
|
Post by bob on Dec 20, 2016 18:25:25 GMT
The original poster clarified himself by saying that there were three Spear elements, not 3Sp, for as we all know there are no "fast" spear DBA three. Fab, The solution that is shown is the solution from 2.2 by the way.
|
|
|
Post by Roland on Dec 22, 2016 5:15:13 GMT
So do I understand correctly that a column contacted in the flank turns to face the attacking line as a column rather than each LH base turning to face each Sp base that contacts it?
Cheers, Fred
|
|