|
|
Post by Haardrada on Oct 7, 2017 15:15:00 GMT
I would like to add to the debate if it's at all relevant.On the subject of moving into contact I have always wondered why (due to the need to the alternative move system)that its allowed for a unit to contact a flank or rear of an element when without an alternative movement system the target element would or could adjust face to meet such an attack?Call me an old fuddy-duddy but by the old W.R.G.system both sides would move simultaneously from left to right have tested reaction to any such threat?I don't want to go back to that system,but it does not look right when an element can move and attack an enemy flank or rear avoiding frontal contact when the target element could react to the threat.I certainly do not see a problem if the target element is already in contact with an enemy element or if the attacking element can move more rapidly than the target element.
Has this view been discussed before or what is the rationale behind the rule?As an alternative could it be suggested that an element that wishes to contact an enemy element and can move at the same pace or slower can only contact a flank or rear if beyond the imaginary line extending to flank/rear of the target element or if the target element is already in contact on that facing by an enemy element or an overlapping element closing the door?
In short a modification to the rule demonstrated by figure 8.
|
|
|
|
Post by Simon on Oct 8, 2017 10:18:55 GMT
I would like to add to the debate if it's at all relevant.On the subject of moving into contact I have always wondered why (due to the need to the alternative move system)that its allowed for a unit to contact a flank or rear of an element when without an alternative movement system the target element would or could adjust face to meet such an attack?Call me an old fuddy-duddy but by the old W.R.G.system both sides would move simultaneously from left to right have tested reaction to any such threat?I don't want to go back to that system,but it does not look right when an element can move and attack an enemy flank or rear avoiding frontal contact when the target element could react to the threat.I certainly do not see a problem if the target element is already in contact with an enemy element or if the attacking element can move more rapidly than the target element. Has this view been discussed before or what is the rationale behind the rule?As an alternative could it be suggested that an element that wishes to contact an enemy element and can move at the same pace or slower can only contact a flank or rear if beyond the imaginary line extending to flank/rear of the target element or if the target element is already in contact on that facing by an enemy element or an overlapping element closing the door? In short a modification to the rule demonstrated by figure 8. I am sorry if I am being a bit thick here and missing the point or misreading things but do you not think that the existing turn to face rule and the restrictions on where you need to be to make a flank or rear contact dela with the issues you raise? Thanks Simon |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Oct 8, 2017 12:54:44 GMT
Sorry Haardrada, but I entirely agree with Simon. The rules on page 9 paragraph 11 and page 10 paragraph 1 already seem to cover what you describe. However, I do agree with you when it comes to littoral landings. I think it is completely daft that amphibious troops can sail across a waterway (which is a move in itself), spend time disembarking (which, like dismounting, is another move in itself), and then make a normal move directly into contact with the enemy. And while all this is going on, all in a single move, their opponents just stand there motionless and unable to react. I think that littoral landings should obey the same limitations as troops making extra moves:- “May not start or go within 1 BW of the enemy”, even if they are on a road. Some potentially useful player aids can be found here, including the latest June 2017 FAQ and the Quick Reference Sheets from the Society of Ancients:-
fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Reference_sheets_and_epitomes
|
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on Oct 8, 2017 13:07:03 GMT
To simplify my point..in figure 8 element b is allowed to contact Cavalry x on its front or side edge.If element b elects to contact the side of Cav x then Cav x turns to face but receives a -1 combat modifier.
My view is that if were not for the alternative bound system Cav x would face element b before contact,thus element b should not be allowed to contact Cav x unless behind an extended line extending from Cav x's front face unless another element contacts Cav x frontally or is an existing overlap and is closing the door.
It is too easy for a facing element to contact an opposing flank.If the attacking element is more rapid then it could be taken into consideration and the fog of war arguement does not justify that an attacking element can make contact in such a way every time.To me a unit that is not in combat would not simply let another unit march/charge up and move round it's flank without changing formation or facing.
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Oct 8, 2017 13:37:38 GMT
To simplify my point..in figure 8 element b is allowed to contact Cavalry x on its front or side edge. If element b elects to contact the side of Cav x then Cav x turns to face but receives a -1 combat modifier. Er...are you sure about Cavalry 'X' receives a -1 combat modifier? Why? Isn't what you describe the same as that shown in diagram 14a? Once an element has turned to face, where does the -1 combat factor come from if no other elements are involved? Some potentially useful player aids can be found here, including the latest June 2017 FAQ and the Quick Reference Sheets from the Society of Ancients:-
fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Reference_sheets_and_epitomes
|
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on Oct 8, 2017 14:19:12 GMT
To simplify my point..in figure 8 element b is allowed to contact Cavalry x on its front or side edge. If element b elects to contact the side of Cav x then Cav x turns to face but receives a -1 combat modifier. Er...are you sure about Cavalry 'X' receives a -1 combat modifier? Why? Isn't what you describe the same as that shown in diagram 14a? Once an element has turned to face, where does the -1 combat factor come from if no other elements are involved? Some potentially useful player aids can be found here, including the latest June 2017 FAQ and the Quick Reference Sheets from the Society of Ancients:-
fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Reference_sheets_and_epitomes
I thought that the -1 modifier for being contacted on the flank still applied even though the element turns to face? If this is incorrect we've been playing it that way for a while.😶 |
|
|
|
Post by scottrussell on Oct 8, 2017 14:34:04 GMT
Haardrada,
I am afraid you have been playing it incorrectly for a while.
I am curious about which part of the rules led you to believe that the -1 modifier applied. I think if you read it again starting from the premise that it doesn't apply (which is the case), you will change your view.
Scott
|
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on Oct 8, 2017 14:56:15 GMT
Haardrada, I am afraid you have been playing it incorrectly for a while. I am curious about which part of the rules led you to believe that the -1 modifier applied. I think if you read it again starting from the premise that it doesn't apply (which is the case), you will change your view. Scott The move into contact from the front (although a flanking) position allowing flank contact was part of the error as in other rules for other period games do not allow such contact unless the unit making the contact does so from behind an invisible line extending from the target units front face.The second error was the assumption that the initial contact on the flank,despite the element being allowed to turn to face if able incurred the -1 factor for being contacted on the flank. |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Oct 8, 2017 15:23:47 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on Oct 8, 2017 15:48:40 GMT
What no Battle of Aegospotami!...or is that one classed as a naval action?😁 |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Oct 8, 2017 17:18:52 GMT
Ha!…you can do better than that Haardrada.  When Richard the Lionheart began his withdrawal from the Holy Land in 1192 AD, Saladin laid siege and assaulted the coastal fortress of Jaffa, capturing all but the citadel. On the 27th of July Richard with a small force arrived by sea, and he immediately stormed ashore and defeated Saladin’s forces within the city. However:- With only 54 knights, a few hundred infantry, and 2,000 Genoese/Pisan crossbowmen, it was more like a large skirmish. And it was really a city assault from the sea, and not a full land battle out in the open. Lastly, he stormed ashore with his entire force, small as it was, and not just part of it. None of the above can be reproduced with the current Littoral Landing rules.  Some potentially useful player aids can be found here, including the latest June 2017 FAQ and the Quick Reference Sheets from the Society of Ancients:-
fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Reference_sheets_and_epitomes
|
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on Oct 8, 2017 18:22:58 GMT
Ha!…you can do better than that Haardrada. When Richard the Lionheart began his withdrawal from the Holy Land in 1192 AD, Saladin laid siege and assaulted the coastal fortress of Jaffa, capturing all but the citadel. On the 27th of July Richard with a small force arrived by sea, and he immediately stormed ashore and defeated Saladin’s forces within the city. However:- With only 54 knights, a few hundred infantry, and 2,000 Genoese/Pisan crossbowmen, it was more like a large skirmish. And it was really a city assault from the sea, and not a full land battle out in the open. Lastly, he stormed ashore with his entire force, small as it was, and not just part of it. None of the above can be reproduced with the current Littoral Landing rules. Some potentially useful player aids can be found here, including the latest June 2017 FAQ and the Quick Reference Sheets from the Society of Ancients:-
fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Reference_sheets_and_epitomes
I'm not a Lionheart fan so wouldn't have known of this,but it is interesting all the same....I prefer the Earlier Normans who valued the Muslim troops fighting qualities and So included them in their armies.😊 |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Oct 18, 2017 12:34:21 GMT
There has been much discussion recently about the problems with the current “Moving into Contact” rules. Here are a few suggestions for DBA 3.1 to make the system simpler and less confusing. Change "contacting" and "contacted" to "conforming"Page 9 paragraph 9 says “the contacting (i.e. moving) troops must conform”… Page 9 paragraph 10 says “unless turning to face, contacted (i.e. stationary) elements conform on contact”… Can we please have a little consistency here by changing the words “contacting & contacted” to “conforming”. Then everything will match rule 9.10: “single elements conform to a moving group unless in rough or bad going, otherwise the moving troops conform”. Get rid of the "or fight as if in full contact and overlapped"The “If Conforming Prevented” rule on page 9 paragraph 10 gives the stationary troops the option to conform or fight as if overlapped. Is this choice really necessary? Why not simplify things by saying they must conform, just like everybody else. This option can cause unwanted complications and it would be one less rule to remember. Change the "waiting until the end of the movement phase to turn and face"Page 10 paragraph 1 says “immediately after the movement phase, turn to face, unless already in frontal close combat”. This is a bit confusing. If I first move my knights to attack an enemy’s flank, then move my psiloi into mutual front-edge contact, does the enemy turn to face my knights? Because at end of the movement phase, the enemy is already in frontal close combat, with the psiloi! And what does “immediately after the movement phase” actually mean? Does it mean after my knights and psiloi have finished moving, or does it mean after my whole army has moved? Personally, I think it should say:- “immediately after the conforming troops have conformed, turn to face, unless currently in frontal close combat”. Then the enemy will have to turn to face the knights, if they are the ones to make 1st contact (after all, having knights charging into your flank is a damn sight more dangerous than facing pesky skirmishers…and one would presume that troops would face the greatest danger…in this case decided by the moving player who's bound it is). If neither party can conform then the contact cannot happenPage 9 paragraph 9 lists the only way elements can end a movement phase in contact: in front, flank, rear, or overlap. But sometimes there are situations where neither player can conform due spacing or lack of space. In these cases I think contact, other than overlap contact, should not be allowed. It does mean that sometimes pursuers, who should conform but cannot, and nor can their opponents, have to halt, so the pursuit stops 1mm from contact (just assume it’s down to battlefield confusion or disorder, and that although a few of the men have pursued into melee, not enough have to be classed as ‘fully in contact’). Give pursuing troops a free conforming moveConsider the picture below:-  The pursuing red element ‘A’ is all right (if it has enough movement to conform), because page 12 paragraph 11 says:- “pursuing elements line-up if they make contact with their front-edge or their front-corner contacts the enemy front-edge”. (I presume that element 'A' would line-up to the front of the blue column, as it is in a Threat Zone, even if pursuing) But what if they don’t have enough movement to line-up…and pursuing foot rarely do. And what about pursuing element ‘B’? Are we to assume that these so called impetuous troops are too timid to make contact so they halt before contact? That doesn’t sound very impetuous to me! Much better to give pursuing troops a free conforming move in addition to their normal pursuit move in order to allow them to line-up. So please play a test game and give all the above a go, and see if they do cure many of the existing problems. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---Later Edit: please ignore the items in red below.---
I've changed my mind, and have only left it here for reference. Make all conforming a separate subroutine independent of movement, and get rid of the "free sideways slide if front edges touch" by making all conforming actions free of charge unless in rough or bad going.
Now this will be controversial!
Make all conforming troops have a free less than 1 BW repositioning allotment when trying to conform, once they have made contact, unless they are in rough or bad going, even when they are trying to line-up to flank or rear.
(The rough or bad going exception is to prevent troops from ‘closing the door’ too easily from an overlap position in harsh terrain)
Consider the following picture:-
The pursuing red element ‘A’ is all right (if it has enough movement to conform), because page 12 paragraph 11 says:-
“pursuing elements line-up if they make contact with their front-edge or front-corner”.
(I presume that element 'A' would line-up to the front of the blue column, as it is in a Threat Zone, even if pursuing)
But what if they don’t have enough movement to line-up…and pursuing foot rarely do.
And what about pursuing element ‘B’? Are we to assume that these so called impetuous troops are too timid to make contact so they halt before contact? That doesn’t sound very impetuous to me!
Much better to have it use it's free 1 BW conforming allotment to line-up with the flank of the column, which will then turn to face (assuming that element 'A' is not there of course).
It will mean that sometimes troops will exceed their normal movement…but they do anyway when they free slide.
And it does mean that all those contacts in diagram 10 on page 20 will be legal…they just haven’t conformed yet.
But all this is for the better: it’s quick, it’s clear, it solves potential conforming problems, and it speeds up the game by reducing the need to make fiddly measurements with 15mm figures (important when you have fingers like bananas like me! )Some potentially useful player aids can be found here, including the latest June 2017 FAQ and the Quick Reference Sheets from the Society of Ancients:-
fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Reference_sheets_and_epitomes
|
|
|
|
Post by ronisan on Oct 18, 2017 12:50:31 GMT
But what if they don’t have enough movement to line-up…and pursuing foot rarely do. And what about pursuing element ‘B’? Are we to assume that these so called impetuous troops are too timid to make contact so they halt before contact? That doesn’t sound very impetuous to me! Much better to have it use it's free 1 BW conforming allotment to line-up with the flank of the column, which will then turn to face (assuming that element 'A' is not there of course). It will mean that sometimes troops will exceed their normal movement…but they do anyway when they free slide. And it does mean that all those contacts in diagram 10 on page 20 will be legal…they just haven’t conformed yet. But all this is for the better: it’s quick, it’s clear, it solves potential conforming problems, and it speeds up the game by reducing the need to make fiddly measurements with 15mm figures (important when you have fingers like bananas like me! )
Hello Stevie, did you consider, that 'pursuing' is a combat outcome move (like recoil and flee) and not part of 'movement'? It doesn't count as movement. So - troops don't exceed their normal movement by pursuing. See page 9: "Elements contacted this bound by enemy or whose front edge ist still in contact when combat ends automatically conform if necessary."
Please, don't make DBA 3.1 more complicated than DBA 3.0!!! DBA 3.0 works in a wonderful way! Cheers, Ronald. |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Oct 18, 2017 13:47:57 GMT
Hello Stevie, did you consider, that 'pursuing' is a combat outcome move (like recoil and flee) and not part of 'movement'? It doesn't count as movement. So - troops don't exceed their normal movement by pursuing. See page 9: "Elements contacted this bound by enemy or whose front edge is still in contact when combat ends automatically conform if necessary." Cheers, Ronald. Ha!...my point exactly.  In my picture, suppose the pursuing red element 'A' had lined-up with the front of the blue column... ...how could the blue column then conform to element 'B'? It would already be in frontal close combat with element 'A'. Therefore, pursuing element 'B' would have to conform instead, just as page 12 paragraph 11 says (Pursuit Contact). But if element 'B' were heavy foot (4Bd, 4Pk, or 4Wb), it only has an allowance of half a base width with which to pursue. And half a base width is not enough to line-up and conform to the flank of the blue column, not after it has moved forward a bit. Giving conforming troops a free 1BW with which to conform helps to to make impetuous pursuing troops actually pursue. This means that pursuing heavy foot could cover a distance of one and a half BW...which exceeds their normal pursuit distance. But they only get the free 1 BW to conform after they make contact, and just for conforming purposes. They couldn't use it to maintain contact with a recoiling element that fell back a full base width, like Joe Collin's is proposing Ax should do. If Joe's Ax recoil a full base width, then Bd of any kind can still only pursue half a base width...i.e. no contact, then no free 1 BW to conform. By the way, I should really say "a free conforming allotment of less than a base width"... ...otherwise people will start to use this free conforming to justify moving into a corner-to-corner overlap position and then using the free conforming entitlement to slide straight into lined-up mutual front-edge close combat. Please, don't make DBA 3.1 more complicated than DBA 3.0!!! DBA 3.0 works in a wonderful way! Except when it doesn't of course. And which is simpler and easier to remember:- All troops get a free less than 1 BW with which to spend on conforming...
Or, sometimes you get a free slide (if fronts touch), sometimes you don't (if a front touches a flank or rear), and measuring can be fiddly.
Some potentially useful player aids can be found here, including the latest June 2017 FAQ and the Quick Reference Sheets from the Society of Ancients:-
fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Reference_sheets_and_epitomes
|
|
