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
Conforming to gaps in the line
Page 1 sur 1
Poster un nouveau sujet   Répondre au sujet
 Art De La Guerre Index du Forum > Rules question V4
Auteur Message
Gingerdave
Barbare


Inscrit le: 15 Sep 2017
Messages: 29
MessagePosté le: Sam Juil 29, 2023 7:36 am    Sujet du message: Conforming to gaps in the line Répondre en citant
So here's the situation. Numbers facing down, letters facing up, _ are gaps. Less than 1UD between the lines so everyone is in a ZOC.

1111___2222___3333___4444

AAAABBBBCCCCDDDDEEEE

Those gaps in the number line are 0.75 UD. Letters charge.

1111___2222___3333___4444
AAAABBBBCCCCDDDDEEEE

B has to conform to 2. D to 3. E to 4. There's no space for C, so it shifts backwards and doesn't take part in the combat, correct? Or does incomplete conformation apply?

Similar situation, assume that the letters are two groups, ABC from one and DE another.
If ABC charge:

1111___2222___3333___4444
AAAA__BBBB___CCCC
_________________DDDDEEEE

Formatting not perfect!

E can't slide due to the ZOC, so can only charge forward. D can't get in because there's no space. It might even have been shifted so can't move. Correct?

Something like this happened a few nights ago.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Neep
Légionaire


Inscrit le: 09 Jan 2023
Messages: 132
MessagePosté le: Sam Juil 29, 2023 2:53 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
C is supporting B, so, page 53, it cannot be shifted out of support.
I think by page 50 "must conform as fully as possible" B and C would slide right, resulting in an incomplete conformation where C is supporting both B and D. Not certain, but it seems fair.

[EDIT - looking at it again it appears there is supposed to be 3/4 UD between the numbered units. So Dick is right, C would fight 2 with B supporting both A and C.
Thinking about it some more, there would be times when pivoting and sidling as much as possible will not be beneficial. I'm not sure whether contact that will conform incompletely just stops where it is, or attempts to maximize contact and/or alignment. Or maybe a choice?]


Dernière édition par Neep le Sam Juil 29, 2023 5:21 pm; édité 1 fois
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: Sam Juil 29, 2023 3:50 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
A to E stay as they are .
Think most threatening enemy p35.
A fights 1
C fights 2 (most in contact)
B supports A & C
D&E are equally in contact
Diagram top p53
Units in contact cannot be shifted.
So D&E stay as they are count either as main melee unit and other as support.

Second question D hits C and stops while E carries on to contact 4
_________________
Player 747 don't call me Jumbo
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
ALEXANDER
Vétéran


Inscrit le: 28 Déc 2021
Messages: 171
MessagePosté le: Sam Juil 29, 2023 5:41 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
I agree with dickstick.

C will fight against 2 and B will give support to A and C

But
if the gaps are.075 UD
E will not be in the zoc of 4 and will not even make contact with 4....

D and E are both in contact with 3 with 1/2 UD of their front. If D conforms to 3 and E is pushed to the right
E will contact the new enemy 4.
I am not sure whether E will then separate from the group and conform to 4

I changed the numbers 1,2and 3 to XYZ

XXXXOOOYYYYOOOZZZZOOO4444
AAAABBBBCCCCDDDDEEEE
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Neep
Légionaire


Inscrit le: 09 Jan 2023
Messages: 132
MessagePosté le: Sam Juil 29, 2023 6:27 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Another good point..

When you attempt to diagram, remember to 1. Highlight 2. punch the "Code" button.
Code:

1111___2222___3333___4444

AAAABBBBCCCCDDDDEEEE


OK, so if D conforms to 3 (assuming it is slightly more to the right than illustrated), does E have to fall back rather than contact 4? or more likely E must stop at the corner of 4 leaving D in incomplete conformance with 3? or as it will be incomplete regardless, do they just sit there awaiting the numbered units to conform in their turn?

Of course a lot of this could be avoided by a shrewd slide before the charge (assuming you could)
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Hazelbark
Magister Militum


Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014
Messages: 1544
MessagePosté le: Sam Juil 29, 2023 11:17 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Gingerdave a écrit:
Correct?

Something like this happened a few nights ago.


So as others posted, no this is not correct assuming they all charge in a single move.

They fight as if they aligned with units potentially being in support in between. Then after one round of combat the units that alternate will following conforming rules and line up. Likely being alternating again.

If this was done as a geometric ploy it is going to get slaughtered assuming normal dice distribution.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
ALEXANDER
Vétéran


Inscrit le: 28 Déc 2021
Messages: 171
MessagePosté le: Lun Juil 31, 2023 8:44 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Just imagine some unit of 1 to 4 would have front to the right (with or without gaps / I not sure about the gaps)

These contacts would be flank attacks that cannot correctly conform

The contact would therefore not be allowed

So the group move of AtoE would be illegal
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
madaxeman
Magister Militum


Inscrit le: 01 Nov 2014
Messages: 1469
Localisation: Londres Centraal.
MessagePosté le: Lun Juil 31, 2023 10:30 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
ALEXANDER a écrit:
Just imagine some unit of 1 to 4 would have front to the right (with or without gaps / I not sure about the gaps)

These contacts would be flank attacks that cannot correctly conform

The contact would therefore not be allowed

So the group move of AtoE would be illegal


I'm sure there is an answer, although probably one that involves asking any opponent who might have sought to deliberately set this sort of situation up to create an advantage to step outside, and then locking the door behind them.

Otherwise you are into the teritory of asking two adults to agree a sensible solution as per the rules set out in paragraph 5, p11 of the rulebook.
_________________
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
Hazelbark
Magister Militum


Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014
Messages: 1544
MessagePosté le: Lun Juil 31, 2023 11:01 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
ALEXANDER a écrit:
Just imagine some unit of 1 to 4 would have front to the right (with or without gaps / I not sure about the gaps)
These contacts would be flank attacks that cannot correctly conform
The contact would therefore not be allowed
So the group move of AtoE would be illegal


If i understand your point, you are wrong. The contact would be allowed as a non-flank attack. There are other weaknesses of this OP defensive position.
Condier p 63 diagram A1 and A3 and A4.

Overall the OP and this suggest that people are still in the dbx universe and don't realize most of these geometric ploys are sub optimal. There was a tournament, as i understand it, where a DBx player tried these and was cut to ribbons because they thought the dbx contact rules somehow applied.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
ALEXANDER
Vétéran


Inscrit le: 28 Déc 2021
Messages: 171
MessagePosté le: Mar Aoû 01, 2023 9:06 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
madaxeman a écrit:

I'm sure there is an answer, although probably one that involves asking any opponent who might have sought to deliberately set this sort of situation up to create an advantage to step outside, and then locking the door behind them.


I just wanted to point out that the rules of conformation are in favor of the attacker, if it is a frontal contact...
....but in favor of the defender, if it is a flank contact.

...and it is already played this way.
Remember it is already almost normal to turn a Heavy Infantery1 to the right to protect HI2 from a flank attack.


OOOOOOOHI1 ......A
OOOOOOHI1..........A
OOOOOHI1.............A
HI2HI2HI2..............B
................................B
................................B

Unit B is not allowed to attack HI2 in the flank
...and B cannot support A
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
lionelrus
Magister Militum


Inscrit le: 21 Mar 2009
Messages: 4711
Localisation: paris
MessagePosté le: Mar Aoû 01, 2023 11:16 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Why B is not allowed to attack?
_________________
"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
ALEXANDER
Vétéran


Inscrit le: 28 Déc 2021
Messages: 171
MessagePosté le: Mar Aoû 01, 2023 12:25 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Sorry, it was version 3

B can attack HI2 and will conform to the front of HI2
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
  
 Art De La Guerre Index du Forum > Rules question V4
Page 1 sur 1
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