|
|
Post by Dangun on Jan 18, 2017 4:29:44 GMT
It seems undesirable, that the rules do not allow the Roman cavalry to cross the threat zone of the LH-element-which-was-not-recoiled, to follow up on the element it was just fighting.
it is especially unsatisfactory, when the there is no way of the Roman cavalry making legal contact the LH-element-which-was-not-recoiled projecting the threat zone.
This seems to be an undesirable consequence of the x-ray ZOC and elements which are wider than they are deep. In other words, an unintended consequence of the rules, rather than a premeditated feature of the rules.
|
|
|
|
Post by lkmjbc on Jan 18, 2017 17:39:26 GMT
It seems undesirable, that the rules do not allow the Roman cavalry to cross the threat zone of the LH-element-which-was-not-recoiled, to follow up on the element it was just fighting. it is especially unsatisfactory, when the there is no way of the Roman cavalry making legal contact the LH-element-which-was-not-recoiled projecting the threat zone. This seems to be an undesirable consequence of the x-ray ZOC and elements which are wider than they are deep. In other words, an unintended consequence of the rules, rather than a premeditated feature of the rules. Yes it would be undesirable if the rules stated this. They don't. The Roman cav can contact the LH to its front. "An element or group whose front edge enters an enemy TZ or touches its far edge can move only:" The Romans are in the Threat zone of LH to their front. They are touching the far edge. They move to contact them. The Romans will fight without being overlapped. If recoiled, they will be destroyed as they have an element in contact with their flank. Joe Collins |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Jan 18, 2017 18:55:14 GMT
Thanks for your input Joe.
So troops already in a threat zone CAN enter a new threat zone, and diagram 7b is correct (no 'paralyzed' elements then).
And Fab...I owe you an apology...you were right all along:- 
The move is allowed because the Roman Cv reaches a perfectly legal front contact. The Roman Cv does not suffer an overlap by the flanking LH because the LH is not in a "right-to-right or left-to-left front corner contact" (page 10 Close Combat 3rd para). But it is destroyed if it loses by more than 1/2 because it "has an enemy front edge in contact with its side or rear edge" (page 12, Destroyed Elements). |
|
|
|
Post by bob on Jan 18, 2017 22:28:53 GMT
Sorry Joe, an element whose front edge enters an enemy TZ can move only move "to line up its front edge with one such enemy generating the TZ or (b) to advance into or towards contact with such an enemy or (c) if a single element, to move straight back to its own rear for the entire move."
The rules do not state what to do if an element is already in a TZ and then tries to move into a TZ it is not already in. I believe it is not allowed to break one rule to fulfill another. Thus such a move is not allowed. Like some other diagrams, 7b is not a correct interpretation of the rules.
An element can never cross a TZ without reacting. Such an element is not ever paralyzed as Stevie suggests as it is allowed to move to its rear. Sometimes that presents difficulties.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dangun on Jan 19, 2017 4:35:41 GMT
It seems undesirable, that the rules do not allow the Roman cavalry to cross the threat zone of the LH-element-which-was-not-recoiled, to follow up on the element it was just fighting. it is especially unsatisfactory, when the there is no way of the Roman cavalry making legal contact the LH-element-which-was-not-recoiled projecting the threat zone. This seems to be an undesirable consequence of the x-ray ZOC and elements which are wider than they are deep. In other words, an unintended consequence of the rules, rather than a premeditated feature of the rules. Yes it would be undesirable if the rules stated this. They don't. The Roman cav can contact the LH to its front. I am confused Joe. You and Bob have diametrically opposed readings of the rules in this situation. So to be blunt, which is it? To help understand the problem, maybe you and Bob could be clear about which Numidian threat zones you believe the Roman Cavalry are currently affected by? This is the core of the difference I believe. No? |
|
|
|
Post by righteousaussiegamer on Jan 19, 2017 4:59:49 GMT
Heya, 1.1a: Can I just query what "advance into or towards contact means"? to everyone. As I think this may make a difference. 1.1b: "Advancing" I would go with something like the front-edge of the element in some fashion has to always move closer to the enemy producing the TZ (without any of the element going backwards or leaving the TZ once entered) 1.2a: It does concern me also that 7b does not seem to indicate that Sp B ever gets the option of contacting or lining up with Bd X. Is this an oversight? or as I think Bob is saying a deeper mystery/concern? 1.2b: So I do wonder now if the starting and entering a TZ is only checked for the first instance in any move? i) if you start in TZ or TZ's you respond to it/them only, even if you later enter another? ii) if you move into a TZ or simultaneously into Tz's you respond to it/them only, even if you later enter another? I've lost sleep over 7b  (not as much as 13d though, that may be cleared up now even if I don't really like the answer.) Alex. Ps: also losing sleep over question/statement numbering conventions  |
|
|
|
Post by lkmjbc on Jan 19, 2017 18:06:30 GMT
Yes it would be undesirable if the rules stated this. They don't. The Roman cav can contact the LH to its front. I am confused Joe. You and Bob have diametrically opposed readings of the rules in this situation. So to be blunt, which is it? To help understand the problem, maybe you and Bob could be clear about which Numidian threat zones you believe the Roman Cavalry are currently affected by? This is the core of the difference I believe. No? The Roman's suffer from both the threat zones of the elements that recoiled. They may react to either threat. We did argue quite late in the development of the rules that Elements in multiple threat zones may only react to the closest element. This I think... think mind you... is how DBMM handles the issue. This was decided against. So, Diagram 7b is correct. In answer to the queries concerning multiple Threat Zones and entering new threat zones during movement... this is a difficult question to answer. Here is my take. If an element starts in multiple threat zones... then it responds as shown in 7b. If an element does not start movement in a threat zone and then enters a threat zone during movement... then it responds only to the first threat zone it entered. If an element not in a threat zone moves into 2 or more simultaneously, then it may respond to either. This squares with 7b as well. If an element starts movement in a threat zone and enters a new one... it may only respond to the original threat zone. This also squares with the diagrams. To answer the query on the definition "advance into or towards contact"... it means what you believe it to mean... and what your opponent believes it to mean. Working out an exact definition to this is fraught with problems. You can always come up with weird situations and geometries that cause problems. There are almost never actual issues with this that I have seen. I've run a tournament or two. Joe Collins That |
|
|
|
Post by righteousaussiegamer on Jan 19, 2017 22:33:30 GMT
Well that seems sensible enough. I've obviously played DBA wrong a number of years (in more than one aspect). The response to only the first TZ's in or entered is new to me (or was it supposed to be like this in 2.2? or earlier), it could 'certainly' be read that way (omission of a phrase like 'An element/group must respond "only" to a TZ it starts in or otherwise the first TZ it moves into' is a good way of ambiguising the whole thing), and honestly it is less ambiguous/simpler than how I've played usually seen it played (and it gels with 7b, so I'm sold). That means the roman Cv can only frontally contact one of the LH it recoiled previously (or move directly to its own rear)... yes or no? (I'd be going yes on that one, unless there is a rule that trumps TZ for some reason) can't wait for the improved FAQ . Alex. Ps: Abiguising alas is not a real word... but it should be. |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Jan 19, 2017 23:13:29 GMT
(omission of a phrase like 'An element/group must respond "only" to TZ (' s) it starts in or otherwise the first TZ it moves into' is a good way of ambiguising the whole thing) I think that is an excellent way of putting it Alex. (As for ‘ ambiguising’...I can’t even pronounce it, let alone spell it!) |
|
|
|
Post by righteousaussiegamer on Jan 20, 2017 6:36:49 GMT
That was just a shot at Un-am-big-u-i-zing the TZ rule. (which is the opposite of ambiguising it).
Alex.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dangun on Jan 20, 2017 7:38:57 GMT
If an element does not start movement in a threat zone and then enters a threat zone during movement... then it responds only to the first threat zone it entered. If I could just clarify your ruling, in regards to the example just given, because this situation is not that rare... 1. The Roman Cavalry clearly starts in two threat zones. 2. The options allowable to any element in one (or more) threat-zones would be to advance to contact either of these two elements emitting the aforesaid threat-zone I think this is consensus so far. But am I to understand, that you are also saying: 3. That if the Roman cavalry moves straight forward toward the light horse at the bottom of the photo, he will enter the threat zone of the third light horse (the one that didn't retreat last bound) 4. but he CANNOT change-direction (turn left) and contact this third light horse element (the one that didn't retreat last bound)Implying that threat-zones effects are measured at the beginning, but not during, an element's movement. If this is what you mean, this is QUITE INCONSISTENT with what happens when an element - which does not start inside a threat zone - meets a threat zone mid-movement. And it begs the question, where in the rules do we infer "it may only respond to the original threat zone"? |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Jan 20, 2017 11:06:21 GMT
If an element does not start movement in a threat zone and then enters a threat zone during movement... then it responds only to the first threat zone it entered. But am I to understand, that you are also saying: 3. That if the Roman cavalry moves straight forward toward the light horse at the bottom of the photo, he will enter the threat zone of the third light horse (the one that didn't retreat last bound) 4. but he CANNOT change-direction (turn left) and contact this third light horse element (the one that didn't retreat last bound)Implying that threat-zones effects are measured at the beginning, but not during, an element's movement. If this is what you mean, this is QUITE INCONSISTENT with what happens when an element - which does not start inside a threat zone - meets a threat zone mid-movement. And it begs the question, where in the rules do we infer "it may only respond to the original threat zone"? That is a good point Dangun (Nicolas) But I think that Alex’s suggestion covers the situation quite nicely:- “Elements are only affected by the Threat Zones they start in, or by the first Threat Zone they encounter”. In the first case the Threat Zone effects apply at the beginning of the bound, before movement starts. In the second case the effects apply the moment the moving element enters/touches a TZ, during movement. As for not being able to change direction if they enter a NEW Threat Zone, that is (in a way) already covered by the existing rules:- “...can move only: (a) to line up its front edge (or (b) advance into contact) with one such enemy generating the TZ,” If the troops have already decided to advance against one such enemy, and they then enter a new Threat Zone, they cannot decide to change their target, as that would in effect be aligning or advancing against TWO such enemies...first against one, and then later in the same move, against a second, all in a single bound. (I like to think of it as if their officers or clan leaders don’t have the power or time to reorganize their men to suddenly change direction. They are already committed.) But let’s wait and see what Joe says. |
|
|
|
Post by medievalthomas on Jan 20, 2017 16:49:20 GMT
I'm leaning toward toward:
An element may respond to any Threat Zone it starts in or the first Threat Zone it enters during movement. All other Threat Zones are ignored.
(In other words once you determine which Threat Zone controls movement - either by selecting it if you start in two Threat Zones or by entering a Threat Zone and starting to move in response - all other Threat Zones are ignored. We also have the rare case where you enter two (or more) Threat Zones at the same moment - in which case the moving element would choose which to respond to - just as if it begin in multiple Zones.
I'll take more feedback on this though. Whatever wins out I'll explicitly state the rule in Fire and Ice so beginners will not be baffled.
Thomas J. Thomas
Fame and Glory Games
|
|
|
|
Post by bob on Jan 21, 2017 21:08:22 GMT
I keep thinking about this situation. If the cavalry moves straightforward toward the lower. light horse who's TZ it starts in, it enters the TZ. of the lower left facing LH. OK, let's assume that it can enter that TZ and can therefore respond to that TZ. Thus it is now in the TZ of three light horse. The upper one that recoil, the lower left facing one, and the bottom one.
Therefor the cavalry can turn to face any of the LH or move to contact them. It can then turn to its left, make partial contact with the lower left facing LH and make it to conform. ( hey, how about next time A picture is posted we can identify the component parts with numbers or letters.)
My original confusion was thinking that an element in a TZ cannot move into A TZ it was not in originally. But now I think if it does so move, it is able to respond to the new TZ.
Once an element moves into any element's TZ, it must be able to respond to any such element. There is no precedence of which it started in and which it moved into. No threat Zone can be ignored in that the moving player can respond to any enemy element whose zone it is in at any point Of its move. The element doesn't "remember "whose zones it started in, it only "knows" which zones it is in.
|
|
|
|
Post by wombatdazzler on Jan 22, 2017 1:01:26 GMT
Any TZ started in or entered during the move can be re-acted too.
Just my 2c worth.
cheers
Daz
|
|
(not as much as 13d though, that may be cleared up now even if I don't really like the answer.)
