Art De La Guerre
Bienvenue sur le forum de discussion de la règle de jeu l'Art De La Guerre
 
FAQFAQ RechercherRechercher Liste des MembresListe des Membres Groupes d'utilisateursGroupes d'utilisateurs S'enregistrerS'enregistrer
ProfilProfil Se connecter pour vérifier ses messages privésSe connecter pour vérifier ses messages privés ConnexionConnexion
When can units evade and in what order?
Page 4 sur 4 Aller à la page Précédente  1, 2, 3, 4
Poster un nouveau sujet   Répondre au sujet
 Art De La Guerre Index du Forum > Rules questions V3
Auteur Message
vexillia
Signifer


Inscrit le: 21 Nov 2017
Messages: 355
Localisation: Warrington, UK
MessagePosté le: Dim Juil 28, 2019 11:08 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
If you are going to do this:
Zoltan a écrit:
@Alan - I still don’t accept that the LC can’t evade through the HC as that is based on an unreasonably strict interpretation of “oriented in the same or opposite directionâ€.

Case A:

HCHCHCHC
LCLC

ELEL

Friendly HC are less than 1UD from LC and perfectly parallel. The LC are just within 3UD of the Elephants. The Elephants charge the LC. No one disputes that the LC can turn 180 degrees and interpenetrate the HC in an evade move. 

Try using the Code tag to improve understanding:
Code:
HC HC HC HC
LC LC

El El

I've added some spaces and a lower case l to show how clear it can be. Here's a misaligned example using | to indicate touching bases and double spaces to indicate gaps:
Code:
HC|HC  HC|HC
LC|LC
       LC

  El|El

Hope this helps?
_________________
Martin Stephenson
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé Visiter le site web de l'utilisateur
barnstormer
Javelinier


Inscrit le: 27 Aoû 2018
Messages: 15
MessagePosté le: Dim Juil 28, 2019 9:48 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
As a player maybe the onus is on you not to put your LC and HC in such a position. Leave a bigger than 1UD gap or alternatively have them actually touching or make it obvious (perhaps by stating it aloud as you move) that they are facing the same (or Opposite) position.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Zoltan
Centurion


Inscrit le: 18 Jan 2015
Messages: 443
Localisation: Wellington, New Zealand
MessagePosté le: Dim Juil 28, 2019 10:00 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
barnstormer a écrit:
As a player maybe the onus is on you not to put your LC and HC in such a position. Leave a bigger than 1UD gap or alternatively have them actually touching or make it obvious (perhaps by stating it aloud as you move) that they are facing the same (or Opposite) position.

Well that is the practical outworking of this discussion. I wanted to propose a rules tweak to allow the evader to wheel to line up before determining whether they are blocked by an obstacle as that as how some people are playing this in practice. Unfortunately the rules brainstorm has closed off.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Dickstick
Légat


Inscrit le: 17 Juil 2016
Messages: 680
Localisation: West Bromwich
MessagePosté le: Lun Juil 29, 2019 7:43 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Zoltan a écrit:


I do NOT think trapping an opponent's troops in front of their friends is an intended design feature of ADLG. It's a gamesmanship trick that will discourage new players. We just don't need that rubbish in our game (anymore).


One traps one's own troops in front of one's own troops.

The issue is avoided if you inform your opponent when you move that troops are parallel .
Quite often it is questionable as to why are the LC still in the way of things. Ie why is the owner leaving it there?
This cry for a wheel is a cover up for a lack of forward planning.
_________________
Player 747 don't call me Jumbo
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Zoltan
Centurion


Inscrit le: 18 Jan 2015
Messages: 443
Localisation: Wellington, New Zealand
MessagePosté le: Lun Juil 29, 2019 8:02 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Perhaps a player rushes LC forward to slow the enemy while his slower HC come up behind them to:

a) charge impact HC through the LC next move? 
b) withdraw the LC back through the HC who might be elite shooters

Not exactly “questionable†(implying dubious) moves; bread and butter for cav or steppe style armies.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Dickstick
Légat


Inscrit le: 17 Juil 2016
Messages: 680
Localisation: West Bromwich
MessagePosté le: Lun Juil 29, 2019 8:38 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Questionable does not imply dubious here.
More a question of why are the LC still here.
Your scenario is a perfect example of why they should be there but it's good all the same to make it clear they are are parallel to avoid conflict with the pedant. Especially one who has a tendency to knock the table.
_________________
Player 747 don't call me Jumbo
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
SteveR
Prétorien


Inscrit le: 21 Mar 2018
Messages: 280
MessagePosté le: Sam Aoû 03, 2019 3:09 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
I see that some clarification might help here. The situation in question occurred late in the game. Both the LC and the Cav had moved up as groups, from different directions to confront an enemy. The angle between the lines was around 30 degrees.

We're not talking about an infinitesimal accidental lack of alignment.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
  
 Art De La Guerre Index du Forum > Rules questions V3
Page 4 sur 4 Aller à la page Précédente  1, 2, 3, 4
Poster un nouveau sujet   Répondre au sujet Toutes les heures sont au format GMT

 
Sauter vers:  
Vous ne pouvez pas poster de nouveaux sujets dans ce forum
Vous ne pouvez pas répondre aux sujets dans ce forum
Vous ne pouvez pas éditer vos messages dans ce forum
Vous ne pouvez pas supprimer vos messages dans ce forum
Vous ne pouvez pas voter dans les sondages de ce forum