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
Confroming during a charge
Page 3 sur 3 Aller à la page Précédente  1, 2, 3
Poster un nouveau sujet   Répondre au sujet
 Art De La Guerre Index du Forum > Rules questions
Auteur Message
AlanCutner
Centurion


Inscrit le: 03 Nov 2014
Messages: 451
Localisation: Scotland
MessagePosté le: Ven Jan 10, 2020 5:12 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
You're using that diagram out of context. The diagram shows its possible for a conforming unit to push another unit out of a ZOC, with the penalty that the latter cannot then move. This rule exists to enable contact with most threatening enemy. It has no relevance to the issue we're discussing.

The fundamental question is what takes priority - 'conform to contact' or 'contact most threatening enemy'.

According to Hazelbark we have a ruling on that. And as in my last post I wouldn't want to see a game mechanism that discourages two opposing lines charging each other.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Ramses II
Tribun


Inscrit le: 17 Juil 2015
Messages: 792
Localisation: London
MessagePosté le: Ven Jan 10, 2020 5:26 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
That was more an example. The concept of 'involuntarily exiting a ZoC' taken in conjunction with FAQ p9 example 1, suggests that 'conformation' takes precedence over 'contact the most threatening enemy'.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
AlanCutner
Centurion


Inscrit le: 03 Nov 2014
Messages: 451
Localisation: Scotland
MessagePosté le: Ven Jan 10, 2020 5:36 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
I think we're going round in circles (is there a rule for that?!). FAQ p9 ex1 does not have the charging unit in a ZOC so 'most threatening enemy' is not a factor. Theres no argument that where a ZOC doesn't exist a charging unit conforms to first contact.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Zoltan
Prétorien


Inscrit le: 18 Jan 2015
Messages: 272
Localisation: Wellington, New Zealand
MessagePosté le: Ven Jan 10, 2020 5:57 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
@Ramses:

MC

__HI

Are the MC permited to make an ordinary move past the enemy HI (straight along the HI side edge)?

Or because their front corners touch during the movement, is the MC forced to conform with the HI? Thus what was intended as a simple move to get past the HI is turned into a charge and melee by dint of “passing” front corner contact?
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Ramses II
Tribun


Inscrit le: 17 Juil 2015
Messages: 792
Localisation: London
MessagePosté le: Ven Jan 10, 2020 6:16 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
AlanCutner a écrit:
I think we're going round in circles (is there a rule for that?!). FAQ p9 ex1 does not have the charging unit in a ZOC so 'most threatening enemy' is not a factor. Theres no argument that where a ZOC doesn't exist a charging unit conforms to first contact.
Again, the point is that a unit may exit a ZoC involuntarily see p34 green box at the bottom of the page.
If B3 in that FAQ example were further forwards exerting a ZoC beyond the front edges of B1 and B2, A1 would still have to conform to either of those units rather than move straight ahead.

And Zoltan, if the MC makes any contact with the HI, "even by single corner", it must stop (see charge definition p36). At this point it must conform (p52 and FAQ p18, timing of conformation). so yes, if you like, the simple move to get past the HI is turned into a charge and melee by dint of “passing” front corner contact.
(But that is getting dangerously close to my "red herring" LoL ) Very Happy
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Zoltan
Prétorien


Inscrit le: 18 Jan 2015
Messages: 272
Localisation: Wellington, New Zealand
MessagePosté le: Ven Jan 10, 2020 6:27 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
@Ramses

OK so you read the p.34 charge Definition as:

A charge is ANY move in which a unit HAPPENS TO contact an enemy...

and not

A charge is a move in which a unit WISHES TO  contact an enemy....

Yet FAQ p. 9 examples 2 & 3 explicitly permit A1 to ignore corner to corner contact with an enemy and charge a third party. In these examples A1 is NOT forced to conform by dint of corner to corner contact.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
AlanCutner
Centurion


Inscrit le: 03 Nov 2014
Messages: 451
Localisation: Scotland
MessagePosté le: Ven Jan 10, 2020 6:51 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Looks like we need a formal TB response. Ramses - I appreciate your well argued view but I don't see us agreeing.

For those involved in the Scottish Open this weekend, if it comes up I intend to rule that 'most threatening enemy' takes priority over 'conform to first contact'. I accept this may turn out to be wrong once we hear from the TB. But it provides least blockage to parallel opposing lines contacting each other which seems to me to be more in the spirit of the rules.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Ramses II
Tribun


Inscrit le: 17 Juil 2015
Messages: 792
Localisation: London
MessagePosté le: Ven Jan 10, 2020 7:01 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Zoltan a écrit:
Yet FAQ p. 9 examples 2 & 3 explicitly permit A1 to ignore corner to corner contact with an enemy and charge a third party. In these examples A1 is NOT forced to conform by dint of corner to corner contact.
And in those two examples A1 is not 'charging' because,
  • In Example 2 the two enemy units are already fighting to their front. Consequently by definition A1 can move into a support position or 'charge' B3.
  • In Example 3, A1 starts in contact with both B1 and B2, so may not 'charge' either of these units (see p50 Charge). However it may conform with either, 'charge' B3 or stay put in contact, but not fighting, B1 and B2 (something which I dislike since units in contact ought to fight - but that is yet another issue LoL Very Happy )
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Ramses II
Tribun


Inscrit le: 17 Juil 2015
Messages: 792
Localisation: London
MessagePosté le: Ven Jan 10, 2020 7:18 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
AlanCutner a écrit:
Looks like we need a formal TB response. Ramses - I appreciate your well argued view but I don't see us agreeing.

For those involved in the Scottish Open this weekend, if it comes up I intend to rule that 'most threatening enemy' takes priority over 'conform to first contact'. I accept this may turn out to be wrong once we hear from the TB. But it provides least blockage to parallel opposing lines contacting each other which seems to me to be more in the spirit of the rules.
As I said earlier, having the referee taking a clear position is definitely the thing to do. There have been a number of such 'calls' in the past, some of which were later declared invalid, but I don't think this causes a problem if everyone understands the position at the start of the game - it is a game after all Very Happy

I will contact the TB and see if we can get that confirmation either way.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Zoltan
Prétorien


Inscrit le: 18 Jan 2015
Messages: 272
Localisation: Wellington, New Zealand
MessagePosté le: Ven Jan 10, 2020 7:35 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Ramses II a écrit:
Zoltan a écrit:
Yet FAQ p. 9 examples 2 & 3 explicitly permit A1 to ignore corner to corner contact with an enemy and charge a third party. In these examples A1 is NOT forced to conform by dint of corner to corner contact.
And in those two examples A1 is not 'charging' because,
  • In Example 2 the two enemy units are already fighting to their front. Consequently by definition A1 can move into a support position or 'charge' B3.
  • In Example 3, A1 starts in contact with both B1 and B2, so may not 'charge' either of these units (see p50 Charge). However it may conform with either, 'charge' B3 or stay put in contact, but not fighting, B1 and B2 (something which I dislike since units in contact ought to fight - but that is yet another issue LoL Very Happy )


Seems a bit inconsistent if units already in C2C contact are NOT forced to fight (and can freely move away) yet units which incidently move into C2C contact ARE forced to fight (and can not move away/past).  Confused
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Ramses II
Tribun


Inscrit le: 17 Juil 2015
Messages: 792
Localisation: London
MessagePosté le: Ven Jan 10, 2020 8:04 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
I agree there Zoltan.

If already in C2C contact, I would only expect a unit to be able to move away if it was faster than all enemies it already contacted - a form of disengagement if you will - in which case it might be permissible to charge another enemy or just move out of contact. Staying still and not fighting an enemy that you are touching seems ludicrous, but them's the rules as they stand at the moment.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Hazelbark
Magister Militum


Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014
Messages: 1056
MessagePosté le: Ven Jan 10, 2020 11:00 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
I would add two points for consideration.
Both are in rule amendments.

p 36 bullet at the end of the charge move subsection:
"Charge movement must respect all the precepts relative to Zone of Control"

p 52 about conforming after initial contact: 1st bullet then 1st clear bullet of that:
"In the case of frontal contact, the alignment is made corner to the front corner of the most menacing enemy at the moment of entry into a zone of control."

This to my mind is utterly clear.
" the most menacing enemy at the moment of entry into a zone of control."
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Zoltan
Prétorien


Inscrit le: 18 Jan 2015
Messages: 272
Localisation: Wellington, New Zealand
MessagePosté le: Sam Jan 11, 2020 5:14 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
P.50 definition of a charge requires the charger to make contact with its “front edge”. So a movement that results only in corner to corner contact appears not to meet the definition of a charge (a corner not being a front edge).

The charge definition adds weight to this by explicitly stating that an existing corner to corner contact cannot be a charge if a unit opts to conform. There is no obligation to conform to undertake/continue a melee.

The FAQ p.9 clarifies that a unit only in C2C contact is free to slide along the edge of the enemy to charge a third party. 
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Ramses II
Tribun


Inscrit le: 17 Juil 2015
Messages: 792
Localisation: London
MessagePosté le: Sam Jan 11, 2020 12:10 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
While p50 does require front edge contact, I don’t think we can make that distinction about the definition of a corner. FAQ p9 covers the circumstances where a slide along the flank is possible or prohibited, where a corner contact is made or already exists. In that sense ex1 and ex2 do imply that a corner is considered to be part of the front edge. 

I understood p50 to mean that a unit cannot charge something with which it is already in contact, so the point about the corner is not relevant to it’s definition. 

Evidently we need a decision to be made on this, because it affects a number of concepts and in-game tactics. Unfortunately I have been advised that there will be some delay in replying, so we will have to muddle along for the moment. 
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Nostrebor
Archer


Inscrit le: 20 Déc 2014
Messages: 61
MessagePosté le: Jeu Jan 16, 2020 2:48 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
As a work around till an official answer is generated why not roll a dice. On a 123 it was really slightly to the left and the charging group hits the forward unit, on a 456 it was slightly to the right and hits the trailing group.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
  
 Art De La Guerre Index du Forum > Rules questions
Page 3 sur 3 Aller à la page Précédente  1, 2, 3
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