| Auteur |
Message |
Andy Fyfe
Vétéran
Inscrit le: 14 Fév 2024
Messages: 185
|
 Posté le: Jeu Sep 17, 2026 8:37 pm Sujet du message: Conforming units in contact |
 |
Hi guys,
Simple one:
Do you have to conform to an enemy into a position where you would end up having another enemy unit on your flank or rear.
You are not in a ZoC at the start.
Andy |
|
| Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
lionelrus
Magister Militum
Inscrit le: 21 Mar 2009
Messages: 4951
Localisation: paris
|
| Posté le: Jeu Sep 17, 2026 9:22 pm Sujet du message: |
|
no
_________________
"Quand on a pas de technique, faut y aller à la zob"
Perceval à Yvain et Gauvain. |
|
| Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Andy Fyfe
Vétéran
Inscrit le: 14 Fév 2024
Messages: 185
|
| Posté le: Jeu Sep 17, 2026 9:26 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Thank you for your answer - is there a reference to the rule that covers this?
Andy |
|
| Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Zoltan
Légat
Inscrit le: 18 Jan 2015
Messages: 565
Localisation: Wellington, New Zealand
|
| Posté le: Ven Sep 18, 2026 5:40 am Sujet du message: |
|
| Andy Fyfe a écrit: |
Thank you for your answer - is there a reference to the rule that covers this?
Andy |
Impetuous units have an exemption from making an uncontrolled charge (p.46) if that would result in them ending in a conformation situation where they have enemy on their front AND their side/rear edge. So this does suggest the author wanting to avoid forced jaws-of-death conformation; this is reinforced by Lionel's response to your OP.
But I assume you are talking about a p.51 situation Conforming units already in contact. In your example the would-be conformer does NOT start within any enemy ZoC - so it can not use the errata exemption to avoid a jaws-of-death conformation.
There may be a lacuna in the p.51 errata - or not.
You'll be able to see a jaws of death conformation coming - so that may dictate how you spend the minimum of 1 CP that corps gets on activiation to avoid a forced JoD conformation. |
|
| Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
madaxeman
Magister Militum
Inscrit le: 01 Nov 2014
Messages: 1836
Localisation: Londres Centraal.
|
| Posté le: Ven Sep 18, 2026 2:07 pm Sujet du message: |
|
There appears to be nothing in the English edition of the rules around conforming units already in combat to suggest that units do not conform in such a situation.Â
It’s hard to imagine having anything more important to choose to spend your pips on if such a situation did crop up though ….!Â
_________________
www.madaxeman.com |
|
| Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Andy Fyfe
Vétéran
Inscrit le: 14 Fév 2024
Messages: 185
|
| Posté le: Dim Sep 20, 2026 7:19 pm Sujet du message: |
|
| madaxeman a écrit: | There appears to be nothing in the English edition of the rules around conforming units already in combat to suggest that units do not conform in such a situation.Â
It’s hard to imagine having anything more important to choose to spend your pips on if such a situation did crop up though ….! |
Hi Tim,
I agree. Most people remember the uncontrolled charge exception and conflate it with general conformation.
I'm also happy if this is clarified that the unit does not have to conform. Clarity is all.
Andy |
|
| Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
madaxeman
Magister Militum
Inscrit le: 01 Nov 2014
Messages: 1836
Localisation: Londres Centraal.
|
| Posté le: Lun Sep 21, 2026 10:16 am Sujet du message: |
|
| Andy Fyfe a écrit: | | madaxeman a écrit: | There appears to be nothing in the English edition of the rules around conforming units already in combat to suggest that units do not conform in such a situation.Â
It’s hard to imagine having anything more important to choose to spend your pips on if such a situation did crop up though ….! |
Hi Tim,
I agree. Most people remember the uncontrolled charge exception and conflate it with general conformation.
I'm also happy if this is clarified that the unit does not have to conform. Clarity is all.
Andy |
Given none of us can see anything in the Englsh rulebook to suggest the conformation is not mandatory, it may be one of those occasional wrinkles where the meaning of some word or phrase in the French rulebook has a subtle difference to the English translation?
It's also worth noting that p61, 3rd bullet in the English version explicitly says that multiple attacks can occur during a conformation - although of course there are various types of conformation, of which "Conforming units already in combat" is only one.
p61, Special Cases first bullet does say that there is no cohesion loss in such cases - which I guess is also a bit of a (admittedly minor) blessing.
_________________
www.madaxeman.com |
|
| Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Mike Bennett
Légat
Inscrit le: 11 Nov 2017
Messages: 633
Localisation: Carnforth, Lancashire, UK
|
| Posté le: Mer Sep 23, 2026 3:21 am Sujet du message: |
|
[quote="Andy Fyfe"] | madaxeman a écrit: |
I'm also happy if this is clarified that the unit does not have to conform. Clarity is all.
Andy |
Why do you think that conforming is not required? There is no response from Lionel to the follow on question and nothing in the rules, FAQ, Errata or DT to allow it to be avoided.
IMHO making rules changes based on comments published on a single chat forum like this is ill advised, and does not promote clarity. They may be inaccessible / invisible to many players, and are likely to lead to surprises and maybe ill fealing. |
|
| Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Hazelbark
Magister Militum
Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014
Messages: 1760
|
| Posté le: Mer Sep 23, 2026 3:50 pm Sujet du message: |
|
| madaxeman a écrit: | There appears to be nothing in the English edition of the rules around conforming units already in combat to suggest that units do not conform in such a situation.Â
|
If people cannot find the exception than there is not one. |
|
| Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
|
FAQ
Rechercher
Liste des Membres
Groupes d'utilisateurs
S'enregistrer
Profil
Se connecter pour vérifier ses messages privés
Connexion
