This is going to be a long post in several parts partially because I can only put 3 image attachments into a post. I think the diagrams are only viewable to logged on members. They can be clicked on to enlarge.
First let me state for the record that I am posting this so that I can be sure of giving consistent rulings. I play DBA3, I run DBA3 events, I was a playtester. I am just not prepared to say that I am sold on the whole package. This current debate about moving into contact is a case in point.
I would like to particularly thank Stevie for his balanced and fair presentation of the issue (suggesting that anyone who disagrees has thrown common sense to the wind and shut off their brain) and Tom for adding that this interpretation is “real world” and the only side affect was to push away some tournament players.
I am hoping that the suggestion was not that “Tournament Players” are some sort of plague upon the DBA population. I happen to like Tournaments. I happen to enjoy running them and put a lot of time and money into doing so. I also believe that tournaments help to grow the game. This is where a large group of players gather with a wide range of armies. It shows the visitors and observers that a large and varied community exists for the game in ways that a pair of guys in the corner of a club room around a small table cannot do. But that is just my opinion.
So let us have a go at parsing the DBA Moving Into Contact Rules. I am in no way suggesting that I know which line trumps which and in the end will accept what I believe is the consensus. However I wouldn’t mind having some fallback when I make the rulings other than “Because I Say So”, “Because the FAQ committee says so”, or worse still “If you don’t agree you are lacking common sense”.
Para 1
The general principle is that troops that would contact in real life do so in the game so that moving a front edge into contact with the enemy always results in combat. (1)
At the end of the bound’s movement phase the contacting element or at least one element of a contacting group must be lined up with an enemy element, either;
a) Full mutual front edge contact, (2a)
b) In full front edge to rear edge contact (2b) or,
c) In front edge to side edge contact with front corners in contact, (2c) or,
d) With no enemy in contact to its front, but in overlap (see p10). (2d)
If this is not possible, the move does not happen. (3)
One party moves the minimum distance to conform. (4)
Contactors conform using their tactical move, but an extra sideways slide of up to 1BW is allowed if this is necessary to conform after contacting an enemy front edge. (5)
Elements contacted this bound by enemy or whose front edge is still in contact when combat ends automatically conform if necessary. (6)
Para 2
A single element contacting a single element conforms to it. (7)
A single element or group contacting a group conforms to that group (8)
A single element contacted by a group conforms to it unless entirely in bad and/or rough going in which case the group conforms. (9)
If conforming to a front edge by contactors is prevented by part element spacing between enemy or physically blocked by elements, terrain or a table edge, contacted elements or groups must either conform or fight as if in full contact and overlapped. (10)
Unless turning to face a flank or rear contact (see p10), contacted elements conform at contact. (11)
Clause 1 is not as helpful as one might first think. We will all argue what constitutes real life contact with our own experiences of modern tank warfare, junior athletics, re-enactment groups, putting sarcastic words into the mouth of our figures and so on. What we can’t do is bring up our experiences actual ancient and medieval warfare or explain how real life works in a stop start IGOUGO environment. We will all try to fit “real life” definitions to best fit what suits our situation.
Clauses 2a through 2d could be seen as the definition of “legal contact” which is a useful definition to have especially when Clause 3 is added. The problem is that when confronted with something that stops us getting an element into contact because of the combination of legal contact definitions and physical restrictions we view the situation as unreal, restrictive or lacking common sense. In reality you are often stopped from making contact in one move, but not from setting yourself up for contact in a later move. Consider this – my element is 1mm short of making contact with the enemy. If I argued that in real life there would be a small number of the faster soldiers in the unit ahead of the main press, and that the same would apply to the enemy. Therefore they are in contact and so combat would take place. Would anyone accept that or would instead tell me that I was welcome to make contact in a subsequent move.
Clause 3 is a particular favourite of mine – I like the concept that if you do not have the movement to complete an action in one turn, you do not get to do it that turn.
Clause 4 brings up conforming, and most importantly it states that ONE party moves the minimum distance to conform. That suggests there is no prospect of the two groups shuffling to make the legal contact. This will become important when I get to one of the examples that have come across my view to make a ruling.
Clause 5 brings up the free slide and this has given us trouble in the past. At this point some of us (well specifically me) chose to believe that if you want to hit the flank or rear of an element you have to make legal contact first, because there is NO free slide. I can hear you all asking “What trouble did the free slide rule cause in the past”. Funny you should ask
Not long after DBA3 was published someone asked about getting the free slide if they only had the movement to make corner to corner contact. I (foolishly) bought in early before running my first DBA3 Tournament and said I would be playing it like that because of the “within means AT or WITHIN” rule. I was quickly hauled across the coals for such a ruling. It was pointed out that elements that destroyed an opponent and found themselves corner to corner with another element that had no opponent could get a free slide into contact. Suitably chastened I withdrew the ruling.
Then we get to Clause 6 which rounds off Clause 1 by stating that anyone in partial contact at the end of movement or combat automatically conform. This seems to contradict Clause 3. Those of us that thought moving into flank or rear contact required legal contact assumed that this ruling was for incidental contact through outcome moves. Otherwise why would Clause 3 be required.
Paragraph 2 sets out the hierarchy of conforming which is sensible.
Clause 7 covers single elements – so if a single element contacting a single element conforms to it, shouldn’t that suggest a single element contacting the flank or rear of a single element other than as a legal contact (Clause 2b or 2c) be required to conform , and since there is no free slide (clause 5) then clause 3 kicks in and the move doesn’t happen (unless clause 6 and clause 1 overrule it).
Clause 8 covers a single element or a group contacting a group – so we are in similar circumstances for a single element making contact with the front or rear of a group in other than as legal contact (2b or 2c). Does the lack of a free slide preclude contact at all (Clause 3) or does Clause 1 and Clause 6 take precedence and force conforming.
Clause 9 gives much more leeway for a group contacting a single element. By my reading, if they make any contact at all the single element must conform unless the single element is entirely in bad going – where the group conforms. This last clarification does not encompass many cases since only Ps can group move in bad going, every other contact would be as part of an individual move. The interaction between Camels and other elements in Dunes or Oasis is a little more complex – are the Camels in bad going? If a group of Camels contacts an element of Ax in Dunes, who conforms?
Clause 10 is the fallback for when the conforming hierarchy cannot be met. At this point the contacted element must either conform or fight as if overlapped. This is important. If for some reason none of the three clauses above can be met, then it is the choice of the contacted element how to behave.
Clause 11 states when the conforming takes place, it happens at contact for frontal contact, at the end of movement for flank and rear. This makes the order of contact when hitting an element from multiple directions important and stops two elements from partially striking the front of a single element and then forcing it to conform to them.
Up until now I have ruled that based on the rules above legal contact must be made for flank and rear contact (Clause 2b and Clause 2c) and that the bare minimum of front edge to front edge contact must be made to initiate a free slide to front edge contact. As far as contact from outcome moves went, any subsequent contact through pursuit requires the contacted element to conform at the end of combat. Anything else could not occur in a single bound.
Consensus now seems to be that Clause 1 and Clause 6 are the overriding rules so that any form of contact is allowed and requires the contacted element to conform as a default. But does the contacting element have to make legal contact if it can or can it choose to contact in whatever way it chooses (within the constraints of front/flank/rear contact rules) such that it is most advantageous.
