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
Destruction of Light Infantry - contradiction and a question
Page 1 sur 2 Aller à la page 1, 2  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: 747
Localisation: Rugby & CLWC
MessagePosté le: Jeu Jan 04, 2018 10:35 am    Sujet du message: Destruction of Light Infantry - contradiction and a question Répondre en citant
Just need a tidy up here.

The Rules for this are:

Page 38 Troops that must evade
Citation:
...If they cannot evade or they are still contacted by the charger after an evade move they are eliminated immediately. The unit that destroyed the light infantry ends its movement at the point of contact with no conformation.


Page 52 Destruction of light infantry 2nd paragraph as amended 2017
Citation:
A heavy unit already in melee cannot destroy a LI simply
by contacting it. If a LI is contacted in clear terrain by a
heavy unit, the attacker must conform as if for a melee.
The LI is then automatically destroyed during the melee
phase
. A heavy unit that contacts several LI units can
only destroy one during the melee phase and possibly
another during the pursuit phase. The other LI units that
were contacted are moved away by one UD to break the
contact
.


Clearly, the amendment missed the first statement of the rule on page 38.

The question is what does "moved away" mean?

Does the owner of the LI get to decide to move them laterally because, say, there's an enemy unit blocking their evade?

Dave
_________________
Putting the ink into incompetence
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Viking709
Auxiliaire


Inscrit le: 15 Jan 2015
Messages: 88
MessagePosté le: Jeu Jan 04, 2018 2:35 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Good catch
The original question about impetuous cavalry pursuing into elephants after catching LI in the open is The Impetuous Cav STOP after destroying LI in the open and don't pursue. So the elephant continues as a support to both combats and can stay put or charge the Impetuous cav in his bound
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
MKennedy
Javelinier


Inscrit le: 23 Oct 2017
Messages: 16
Localisation: Maryland
MessagePosté le: Jeu Jan 04, 2018 4:36 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Impetuous cavalry pursuit into elephants were already covered here:

http://www.artdelaguerre.fr/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6291

I see two questions here.

1st: The one that Dave has brought up about "what does "moved away" mean?" and

2nd: Once a LI is contacted in the open by heavy troops, does the heavy troop stop without conforming (per page 38 ) or does the unit conform then destroy the LI (per page 52, 2nd paragraph as amended 2017)?

As to question 1; The LI might not be blocked. And, per page 52 3rd paragraph the LI would be displaced 1 UD back. If unable to, then the LI would be destroyed.

For question 2; I think page 38 got overlooked and that page 52, 2nd paragraph as amended 2017, takes president. Meaning the heavy unit will conform then destroy the LI.
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: 1204
Localisation: London
MessagePosté le: Ven Jan 05, 2018 12:29 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Good catch Dave. It would seem that P38 needs to be amended to bring it into line with the amended p52, to say that the heavier unit conforms as if for melee before the LI unit is destroyed.

There does not appear to be any guidance on what ‘moved away’ means except to apply simple logic and geometry?!
P52 says “it is immediately moved back one UD to break contact. If this move is blocked by another enemy, the light unit is destroyedâ€. So I suggest the following interpretation
  • If the light unit is contacted edge to edge, or enemy edge to light unit corner, the light unit unit must move 1UD in a line perpendicular to the enemy unit edge.
  • If the light unit is contacted by the corner of an enemy unit, it must move 1UD back to somewhere on the 90degree arc based on that corner.
Note, the most common kind of situation will be where the LI must be moved following a melee in which the LI was supporting a unit that got destroyed. In this case it will be a corner contact, so the LI unit will be placed somewhere on the arc to one side.

To the other question Dave, it seems pretty clear that an enemy unit blocking the move causes the destruction of the LI unit, lateral moves are not permitted.
Does this sounds a little harsh, even though corner contacts will allow the LI to scatter, potentially giving the LI some chance to avoid being blocked?
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
fdunadan
Tribun


Inscrit le: 12 Juin 2009
Messages: 978
MessagePosté le: Ven Jan 05, 2018 3:19 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
in the French version, "le LI est reculé d'une UD" so LI goes back 1 UD.
There is no exception, even if the contact is only by a corner (the LI was apporting support to a unit tha has been destroyed), the LI in open terrain and in contact with a heavy troop must go back 1 UD, directly on his rear.
So no turn, no arc...
_________________
Audentes fortuna iuvat.
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: 1204
Localisation: London
MessagePosté le: Ven Jan 05, 2018 4:20 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Ah, so this is a case of “lost in translation†Smile

Other translations are ‘recoil’ and ‘retreat’, so as fdunadan says, it seems the LI should be moved straight back to their rear.

Many thanks for the French words, most helpful.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
plefebvre
Magister Militum


Inscrit le: 30 Déc 2009
Messages: 1174
MessagePosté le: Ven Jan 05, 2018 5:31 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Ramses II a écrit:
Ah, so this is a case of “lost in translation†Smile

Other translations are ‘recoil’ and ‘retreat’, so as fdunadan says, it seems the LI should be moved straight back to their rear.

Many thanks for the French words, most helpful.


No , funadan is wrong, the french version , after official amendments page 52 , says : Les autres LI contactés sont décalées d'une UD ....

Décalées has been translated by moved away which is the nearest correct term.

To move away by one UD means that you have to move in the proper and more direct way which prevents the Li to contact new enemy
_________________
patrick lefebvre

"sic transit gloria mundi"
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
AlanCutner
Tribun


Inscrit le: 03 Nov 2014
Messages: 732
Localisation: Scotland
MessagePosté le: Ven Jan 05, 2018 6:41 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Citation:
To move away by one UD means that you have to move in the proper and more direct way which prevents the Li to contact new enemy


And I'm afraid that is as clear as mud. Its back to the original problem of which direction is more (most?) direct.
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: 1204
Localisation: London
MessagePosté le: Ven Jan 05, 2018 6:59 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Patrick, thanks for the correction, but in the interests of clarity, could you explain further. 
  • Is the direction that the LI moves determined by the way the original enemy unit contacts the LI? 
  • What do you mean by “to move in the proper and more direct way which prevents the Li to contact new enemyâ€?
    The English version of the rules suggest the LI must move 1UD, and if blocked by another enemy unit, they are destroyed. Is there something different in the original French text here?
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Luddite
Archer


Inscrit le: 15 Nov 2017
Messages: 52
MessagePosté le: Ven Jan 05, 2018 7:55 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
And the English text in my view is clear in that the LI "moves back 1UD". I guess its clear based on my assumption that this means "directly to its own rear"?

Very Happy
_________________
http://luddite1811.blogspot.co.uk/
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé Visiter le site web de l'utilisateur
AlanCutner
Tribun


Inscrit le: 03 Nov 2014
Messages: 732
Localisation: Scotland
MessagePosté le: Ven Jan 05, 2018 10:41 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Except it doesn't say 'move back' but 'move away'
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
plefebvre
Magister Militum


Inscrit le: 30 Déc 2009
Messages: 1174
MessagePosté le: Sam Jan 06, 2018 1:27 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
AlanCutner a écrit:
Except it doesn't say 'move back' but 'move away'


Correct.
_________________
patrick lefebvre

"sic transit gloria mundi"
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Luddite
Archer


Inscrit le: 15 Nov 2017
Messages: 52
MessagePosté le: Sam Jan 06, 2018 2:29 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Really?

Mine says the following:

"Following a rout or disengagement from melee, if a light infantry unit would remain in contact (even by a single corner) with an enemy which could destroy it automatically (for example heavy infantry), it is immediately moved back one UD to break contact. If this move is blocked by another enemy, the light infantry is destroyed."
- p52, right column, second paragraph, 2014 Edition.

Err..hang on. What's this "amended 2017" thing about?
_________________
http://luddite1811.blogspot.co.uk/
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé Visiter le site web de l'utilisateur
AlanCutner
Tribun


Inscrit le: 03 Nov 2014
Messages: 732
Localisation: Scotland
MessagePosté le: Sam Jan 06, 2018 4:54 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Dave Allen has quoted the amendment at the top of the thread. It has the words 'moved away'.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Luddite
Archer


Inscrit le: 15 Nov 2017
Messages: 52
MessagePosté le: Sam Jan 06, 2018 8:28 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Agreed, but what does "as amended 2017" refer to? Is there an amended rule edition out that's different to the 2014 version? Question
_________________
http://luddite1811.blogspot.co.uk/
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé Visiter le site web de l'utilisateur
  
 Art De La Guerre Index du Forum > Rules questions V3
Page 1 sur 2 Aller à la page 1, 2  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