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
Clarification of new FAQ regarding side/side contact
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
Ballista
Légionaire


Inscrit le: 15 Jan 2018
Messages: 117
MessagePosté le: Mer Oct 03, 2018 11:08 pm    Sujet du message: Clarification of new FAQ regarding side/side contact Répondre en citant
Situation is

B 2

A 1


A,B facing right
1,2 facing left
B & 2 in front edge melee
1 wheels and charges A who evades, charge move takes them into side contact with B by corner of 1
Are they now able to conform side/side with B under the new clarifications of 1/9/18
A is not zocing 1
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: Jeu Oct 04, 2018 12:55 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Parts of this question fall into areas covered by the new FAQ (relating to movement in enemy ZoC), though much depends on the orientation of the units which cannot be adequately shown in this diagram. 

Assuming that unit 1 can move in a direction that allows it to continue towards the existing melee, when it ends up in contact it conforms into a ‘support’ position. 

Remember, Conformation is merely a rules mechanic used to illustrate a given situation on the table, which allows the players to work out the melee resolution. 
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Ballista
Légionaire


Inscrit le: 15 Jan 2018
Messages: 117
MessagePosté le: Jeu Oct 04, 2018 2:17 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Unit 1 has a clear path once A evades to the side of B
With reference to the new FAQ dated 1/9/18 the question is how does 1 conform to B
side/side as implied in new FAQ ? or
front corner to front corner as per interpretation prior to 1/9/18 ?
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: Jeu Oct 04, 2018 5:20 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
And this is where the diagram is inadequate  Smile LoL. 

Once Unit 1 enters the ZoC of A it’s movement must not move out of that ZoC (see the FAQ), which tends to restrict the initial direction of charge. So it may not be permitted to wheel that far in the first place. (Basically the initial charge must intend to fight A).  

The final Conformation depends on the initial location of 1 relative to the front edge of B. It may only contact the side of B if it starts on the flank, at least partially behind the line extending from the front edge of B (p51).
Otherwise it will face the same way as unit 2, at the point where it makes contact. It does not need to be moved back to be in corner to corner. 
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Ballista
Légionaire


Inscrit le: 15 Jan 2018
Messages: 117
MessagePosté le: Jeu Oct 04, 2018 9:46 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Unit 1 did not enter ZOC of A before A evaded to it's rear
There were no other enemy units who ZOC'd 1 on it's charge move.
Unit 1 did not start behind front of B - that was no problem.
The issue that arose was how did 1 conform to B as it had contacted it's flank at an angle but was not a valid flank charge.
So how does 1 conform to B
The example diagrams provided in the FAQ from 1/9/18 all show units moving past initial corner/corner contact perfectly aligned with friends and enemy units front on. In this example the same situation occurred but at an angle.
Is it aligned front corner to front corner next to 2 facing the same way ? OR

Under the new interpretation from 1/9/18 is it allowed to align side to side with B so it is along the side of B facing in the same direction as 2 ?
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: Jeu Oct 04, 2018 10:20 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
In brief, yes. Although it starts “in front†of A, unit 1 may contact A beyond its front corner and align side by side against A, facing in the same direction as 2. It is not forced to align corner to corner.

(Note, this has always been the case Smile )
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Ballista
Légionaire


Inscrit le: 15 Jan 2018
Messages: 117
MessagePosté le: Ven Oct 05, 2018 1:19 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Always been the case ?
Prior to 1/9/18 amendments, here has always been ruled that must conform front corner/front corner if contacted the flanks of a unit already in melee and not a legitimate flank charge. As was in this case and 1 was moved to front corner front corner contact with B and aligned alongside 2.

The 1/9/18 interpretation was viewed but ruled as it was not a front on charge carefully aligned with 2 and B then this interpretation was not able to be used
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: Ven Oct 05, 2018 7:42 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
@Ballista - you said in the OP that A and 1 were facing each other at the start.

Ramses appears to be saying that the wheel declared by 1 when it declares its charge is constrained to an angle that would enable it to contact A, were A to stand (and not evade), due to A potentially exerting a zoc. Thus, 1 can not wheel far enough to contact B making this a non-sensical scenario to start with.

Similarly, A’s evade angle is constrained to mirror 1’s constrained charge angle. So A would evade well away from B which does not allow 1 to contact B.

Perhaps you could post a photo of actual troops or a photo of a drawing on paper as a more effective illustration of your scenario (please)?
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Ballista
Légionaire


Inscrit le: 15 Jan 2018
Messages: 117
MessagePosté le: Ven Oct 05, 2018 9:02 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
It's the end result that needed clarification, how would 1 conform with B - side/side or front corner/front corner
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 Oct 05, 2018 12:30 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
If A is ZoCing 1 at the strat of the movement of 1, there can't be any Wheel: any move when you're facing a ZoC must leave you more aligned with the ZoCing unit. So if A and 1 are facing each other, 1 can only move straight forward A and can't contact B.

If a is not ZoCing 1 at the start of the move (A is a Light, cause of terrain,...) the 1 can Wheel then declare a charge. If A evades, 1 can pursue the charge up to its maximum movement allowance and then "contact" B. It will not be a legal flank contact since 1 beginned it's move not on the flank of B. The contact is therefore only authorized as a support, and since FAQ of 09/01 allows it, it will be side by side. You simply rotate 1 with the front corner touching B as the pivot.
_________________
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: 1160
Localisation: London
MessagePosté le: Ven Oct 05, 2018 3:17 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Agreed fdunadan, though the initial positions of A and 1 could be such that 1 could continue into contact with B.

However, to some extent this is immaterial to the question posed be Ballista regarding how a unit can move into support, and more importantly, how it conforms following contact.
Ballista a écrit:
Always been the case ?
Prior to 1/9/18 amendments, here has always been ruled that must conform front corner/front corner if contacted the flanks of a unit already in melee and not a legitimate flank charge. As was in this case and 1 was moved to front corner front corner contact with B and aligned alongside 2.

The 1/9/18 interpretation was viewed but ruled as it was not a front on charge carefully aligned with 2 and B then this interpretation was not able to be used
Firstly, beware of using 'interpretations' from other rulesets. AdlG is both less complex and relatively free from such 'interpretations', but those familiar with other rules do need to read the AdlG rules carefully - generally they say what they mean, but not always where you might expect to find the text.

The rules are Event driven to some extent, the detailed situation on the table changing subtly with the movement of each unit or group.
There are two key points here about the definitions of Charge and Support:-

  1. Moving into support is distinctly different from charging an enemy. To "Charge" means being the first unit to move into contact, while moving into "Support" applies to all subsequent units that move into contact, irrespective of whether they are front-edge or side-edge (see support definitions p50).
    The definitions of a "Charge movement" are on P36
    • A "Charging" unit must stop when it contacts the enemy unit and then conform
    • The movement of a "Charging" unit is restricted; it must move in a straight line after any initial direction changes are complete.

  2. A supporting unit does not have these constraints, as it is not "charging". Consequently
    • A unit moving into support does not have to stop on contact, but may continue moving up to the limit of its movement, and it then conforms
    • A unit moving into support may change direction, slide etc during its movement.

  3. "Conformation" (p52) is a rule mechanic and merely facilitates melee resolution.
    • Although it is written from the perspective of a "charging" unit, Conformation also applies to units moving into "support".
    • The third paragraph needs to be applied with care when considering "supporting" units. They need to be aligned (per Support definitions), but not necessarily corner-to-corner unless the supporting unit is 'attacking' the enemy, ie moving into front edge contact with the enemy unit.


In summary, irrespective of whether it slides up the side of an enemy unit that is now engaged in melee or whether it approaches that engaged enemy from an angle, a supporting unit can stay where it is rather than having to be placed in front corner contact with the enemy.

I hope that is sufficiently clear Smile
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: Ven Oct 05, 2018 8:34 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
So if 1 contacts B’s side edge with it’s front right corner only, 1 will simply pivot so that it conforms with B side edge to side edge.

Of course this would leave 1 in a position (in its next turn) to do a quarter turn and charge B’s flank (assuming B and 2 are still in melee and A has not returned to zoc 1).

It’s still a little confusing that 1 starts off declaring a charge move (against A) but due to A’s evade decision 1’s charge turns into a “support move†(against B).
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Korik
Archer


Inscrit le: 19 Juil 2018
Messages: 58
MessagePosté le: Dim Oct 07, 2018 10:33 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
I presume that the first bullet in point 2 of Ramses response still requires the conforming unit to respect the rules concerning flank/rear contact?

For example, a supporting unit could continue it's movement past corner to corner contact to side to side contact, and then claim a 'conform' as being into front edge to side edge contact, with all of the disadvantages to the enemy unit
_________________
Korik
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 Oct 08, 2018 12:22 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Korik a écrit:
I presume that the first bullet in point 2 of Ramses response still requires the conforming unit to respect the rules concerning flank/rear contact?
Yes.
Citation:
For example, a supporting unit could continue it's movement past corner to corner contact to side to side contact, and then claim a 'conform' as being into front edge to side edge contact, with all of the disadvantages to the enemy unit
NO. To attack the flank of an enemy unit (ie front edge to enemy flank), a unit must start at least partially behind the front edge of the enemy unit (p51). If the supporting unit starts "in front" of the enemy, it may move past the front corner of the enemy but will end up side to side with the enemy, not facing the flank.
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 Oct 08, 2018 4:35 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Ramses II a écrit:
NO. To attack the flank of an enemy unit (ie front edge to enemy flank), a unit must start at least partially behind the front edge of the enemy unit (p51). If the supporting unit starts "in front" of the enemy, it may move past the front corner of the enemy but will end up side to side with the enemy, not facing the flank.


Ramses, I think this is the whole point of the OP.

If a unit starts in front of an enemy (that is already fighting to its front) but ends up contacting the enemy’s flank due to a pursuit move, what is the correct play:

1. The pursuer is NOT permitted to contact the enemy’s flank because it started in front of the enemy,

2. The pursuer conforms with the contacted enemy by aligning side edge to side edge. This gives the pursuer a positional advantage in its next move (behind the enemy’s flank). The pursuer counts as +1 support to its friend already fighting the enemy on its front edge,

3. The pursuer conforms with the contacted enemy by being moved backwards into corner to corner contact. Again the pursuer gives its friend +1 support (and side to side contact with its friend). In this position the pursuer remains “in front of†the enemy and has not  gained a positional advantage behind its flank.

You seem to be saying that option 2 above is the correct play.
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 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