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
Another ZoC Question
Page 1 sur 4 Aller à la page 1, 2, 3, 4  Suivante
Poster un nouveau sujet   Répondre au sujet
 Art De La Guerre Index du Forum > Rules questions V3
Auteur Message
daveallen
Tribun


Inscrit le: 28 Jan 2016
Messages: 742
Localisation: Rugby & CLWC
MessagePosté le: Dim Aoû 13, 2017 8:19 pm    Sujet du message: Another ZoC Question Répondre en citant
In the diagrams below A, Y & Z are spear, B is a unit of archers.

First B moves into Z's ZoC to give overlap support to A.




Nothing controversial there. B obeys all the requirements of the ZoC rule when it moves closer to Z.

Next B moves into Z's ZoC to contact Y on the flank in support of A. [Note B does not charge Y, it simply moves into contact as a support]




Again, B obeys all the requirements of the ZoC rule when it moves closer to Z.

However, it seems to me this time B breaks the spirit of the ZoC rule by engaging in melee with a different unit.

Maybe there needs to be a prohibition on moving to engage in melee with any unit other than the ZoC-ing unit.

Dave
_________________
Putting the ink into incompetence


Dernière édition par daveallen le Mar Aoû 15, 2017 9:27 am; édité 1 fois
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Ramses II
Magister Militum


Inscrit le: 17 Juil 2015
Messages: 1160
Localisation: London
MessagePosté le: Dim Aoû 13, 2017 9:14 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Hi Dave, could you confirm that these are two separate examples illustrating the same point / query. Otherwise it seems impossible for Z to move from it's first location to the second.

I agree that it is possible under the rules for a unit, to enter the ZoC of one enemy unit, in order to support a friend that is engaging a different enemy unit.

Your point / question being that while these positions are legal, they may also be regarded as somewhat 'gamey', because the intention is to act against a unit other than the unit whose ZoC has been entered; whether by supporting a friend, shooting at another enemy or, (as in your last example) of moving into melee with a different enemy.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
daveallen
Tribun


Inscrit le: 28 Jan 2016
Messages: 742
Localisation: Rugby & CLWC
MessagePosté le: Dim Aoû 13, 2017 9:38 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Ramses II a écrit:
Hi Dave, could you confirm that these are two separate examples illustrating the same point / query. Otherwise it seems impossible for Z to move from it's first location to the second.

Erm, yes, of course. Just as there is no suggestion that B has teleported between the diagrams.

Ramses II a écrit:
I agree that it is possible under the rules for a unit, to enter the ZoC of one enemy unit, in order to support a friend that is engaging a different enemy unit.

Your point / question being that while these positions are legal, they may also be regarded as somewhat 'gamey', because the intention is to act against a unit other than the unit whose ZoC has been entered; whether by supporting a friend, shooting at another enemy or, (as in your last example) of moving into melee with a different enemy.

No, the first situation is a perfectly reasonable construction of the rules. Any attempt to restrict it would cause serious problems - for instance, such a rule might prevent B being in a group with A as it charged Y.

The second breaks the spirit (as I see it) of the rule, not the letter and since the Technical Directorate is looking at a clarification I thought I'd toss it into the mix.
_________________
Putting the ink into incompetence
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 Aoû 14, 2017 7:14 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
In the second example, is the suggestion that B's ZOC acts as an invisible force field that protects Y's flank and prevents B moving into contact with Y (whether by charging or simple moving). The implication being that whenever a unit enters an enemy's ZOC, the ZOC always starts drawing the enemy towards the ZOCing unit (and distracting it from whatever else it was planning to do).
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
ethan
Signifer


Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014
Messages: 347
MessagePosté le: Lun Aoû 14, 2017 8:24 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
More simply look at the 2nd bullet 1st column on p. 34.

"Advance, make a wheel, quarter-turn, or half-turn in order to align with the most threatening enemy (emphasis original). The unit cannot end its move less aligned than at the beginning."

This move obviously fails this criteria.

See also p. 53 "Conforming and ZOC" (the ZOC applies to conforms as well).[/i]
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
daveallen
Tribun


Inscrit le: 28 Jan 2016
Messages: 742
Localisation: Rugby & CLWC
MessagePosté le: Lun Aoû 14, 2017 8:39 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Zoltan,

that's pretty much what I think. The idea of a ZoC should be to force the ZoC-ed unit to be prepared to respond to the threat. That would stop it engaging with a different enemy, but not prevent it supporting a friend without so engaging.

Unfortunately, the rule itself is not precise and as UK players are new(ish) to the rules, nobody has the authority that goes with with ten years of experience and enables you to say "this is what it really means."

Which is not necessarily a bad thing if we get a clear statement of the rule and everyone has access to it.

Dave
_________________
Putting the ink into incompetence


Dernière édition par daveallen le Lun Aoû 14, 2017 8:49 pm; édité 1 fois
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
daveallen
Tribun


Inscrit le: 28 Jan 2016
Messages: 742
Localisation: Rugby & CLWC
MessagePosté le: Lun Aoû 14, 2017 8:49 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
ethan a écrit:
More simply look at the 2nd bullet 1st column on p. 34.

"Advance, make a wheel, quarter-turn, or half-turn in order to align with the most threatening enemy (emphasis original). The unit cannot end its move less aligned than at the beginning."

This move obviously fails this criteria.

See also p. 53 "Conforming and ZOC" (the ZOC applies to conforms as well).[/i]

Ethan,

please don't be selective in quoting rules - you missed out

Citation:
to move towards or to charge it.


With that extra piece it meets the criteria as written. Also, as it's been described in the other threads - it's no less parallel and isn't in the ZoC of another unit. thus it isn't any less aligned.

We really do need a better explanation of what a ZoC does.

Dave
_________________
Putting the ink into incompetence
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Ramses II
Magister Militum


Inscrit le: 17 Juil 2015
Messages: 1160
Localisation: London
MessagePosté le: Lun Aoû 14, 2017 9:57 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Totally agree Dave that we need comment from the DT.
RAW B is making a legal move in the ZoC because it is still moving closer to Z when it contacts Y.

Indeed, B could start the manoeuvre aligned with Z but also behind the flank of Y. When it moves towards Z it would still contact Y. Is it now permitted (or indeed compelled) to conform on the flank of Y, turning away from Z while in Z's ZoC?
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
ethan
Signifer


Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014
Messages: 347
MessagePosté le: Lun Aoû 14, 2017 11:39 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
daveallen a écrit:


Ethan,

please don't be selective in quoting rules - you missed out



Intentionally or not you are now coming off as a troll. In your original question you could not be bothered to actually quote any rules and when I took the time to manually type some in (accidentally editing out the elipsis ... as that actually isn't really all the relevant) all you can do is respond "don't be selective." Quite a statement from someone who isn't actually trying to parse the rules or quote anything.

In any case the "or charge it" bit is clearly pertaining to the most threatening enemy - read the actual rules section. The modifier on "not becoming less aligned with the most threatening unit is really the key point.

Here I will help.

"Advance, make a wheel, quarter-turn, or half-turn in order to align with the most threatening enemy (emphasis original), move closer to it or charge it (emphasis here is mine) . The unit cannot end its move less aligned than at the beginning."

It is obvious from reading that this means the most threatening enemy, your proposal causes you to be less aligned with the most threatening enemy. Therefore it is not a legal move.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
ethan
Signifer


Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014
Messages: 347
MessagePosté le: Lun Aoû 14, 2017 11:55 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Also as I initially indicated see p. 53. "conforming and ZOC"
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
daveallen
Tribun


Inscrit le: 28 Jan 2016
Messages: 742
Localisation: Rugby & CLWC
MessagePosté le: Mar Aoû 15, 2017 9:08 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Hardly an ellipsis, but let's start again, eh?

This is the third of a series of threads on the problems of the ZoC rule, both the previous quoted the rule, By this time I assumed I didn't have to spell it out again. For the same reason I didn't feel the need to reiterate the meaning of "align." My mistakes.

From "ZoC Question 1 "moving closer:"

plefebvre a écrit:
...
In the first situation the movement is allowed because
-the front of the red unit get closer to the blue unit
-it doesn't move outside the blue ZDC for part of its front is still in blue's ZOC
- when it ends it's move it is not less aligned than at the beginning (to be aligned must be understood as being parallel with the front)
...
The Technical Board


If you look at the diagrams* in that thread you will see a remarkable similarity between the positions of blue and red and of B and Z.

In both diagrams above B meets all criteria for movement in a ZoC. It does not become less aligned as you claim.

As for page 53, I don't see the relevance - no conforming is required in either of the above cases. However, it does throw up another issue that needs addressing (elsewhere though).

Dave

* not included here because I've found that putting extra diagrams into a thread diverts the discussion away from the original point.
_________________
Putting the ink into incompetence
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
daveallen
Tribun


Inscrit le: 28 Jan 2016
Messages: 742
Localisation: Rugby & CLWC
MessagePosté le: Mar Aoû 15, 2017 9:20 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Ramses II a écrit:
Totally agree Dave that we need comment from the DT.
RAW B is making a legal move in the ZoC because it is still moving closer to Z when it contacts Y.

Indeed, B could start the manoeuvre aligned with Z but also behind the flank of Y. When it moves towards Z it would still contact Y. Is it now permitted (or indeed compelled) to conform on the flank of Y, turning away from Z while in Z's ZoC?

No, B isn't permitted to become less aligned to Z while inside the ZoC. So it wouldn't be able to count as a flanking opponent for Y.

Though it could conceivably make necessary adjustments before entering the ZoC. But that is definitely an argument for another thread.
_________________
Putting the ink into incompetence
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
lionelrus
Magister Militum


Inscrit le: 21 Mar 2009
Messages: 4700
Localisation: paris
MessagePosté le: Mar Aoû 15, 2017 10:10 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Infortunatly, Dt is on hollidays.
_________________
"Quand on a pas de technique, faut y aller à la zob"
Perceval à Yvain et Gauvain.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
madaxeman
Magister Militum


Inscrit le: 01 Nov 2014
Messages: 1464
Localisation: Londres Centraal.
MessagePosté le: Mar Aoû 15, 2017 11:14 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
daveallen a écrit:
ethan a écrit:
More simply look at the 2nd bullet 1st column on p. 34.

"Advance, make a wheel, quarter-turn, or half-turn in order to align with the most threatening enemy (emphasis original). The unit cannot end its move less aligned than at the beginning."

This move obviously fails this criteria.

See also p. 53 "Conforming and ZOC" (the ZOC applies to conforms as well).[/i]

Ethan,

Citation:
to move towards or to charge it.


With that extra piece it meets the criteria as written. Also, as it's been described in the other threads - it's no less parallel and isn't in the ZoC of another unit. thus it isn't any less aligned.


My interp (as umpire in this situation) was that as the unit in question was charging into contact with the enemy flank, this could not also be regarded as "moving" towards the ZOCing element, as moving and charging are different thinks, as a move can't end in frontal contact with enemy.

This (I think...) keeps with both the intention of the rules, and provides a way to satisfy the pedants too
_________________
www.madaxeman.com
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé Visiter le site web de l'utilisateur
ethan
Signifer


Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014
Messages: 347
MessagePosté le: Mar Aoû 15, 2017 11:14 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
daveallen a écrit:
Hardly an ellipsis, but let's start again, eh?


Please provide a definition of more or less aligned. I believe your diagram shows a unit becoming less aligned which I believe has two components.

A unit is less aligned if either of the following apply:

- The angle to the unit has become farther away from being paralell
- Were the unit to to align to parallel it would require a shift of greater distance than from its previous position.

You obviously have a different definition what is it?

I will point out (and this is also for the technical board) that if you don't include something like the second bullet then it is possible to exit a ZOC to enter another unit's ZOC, which is not permitted in the rules either.
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 1 sur 4 Aller à la page 1, 2, 3, 4  Suivante
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