Art De La Guerre

[Ramses II]

The following question has been raised outside the forum :

Question 
Unit 1 charges units A and B, destroying unit A. It is now the turn of the opponent and unit B wishes to wheel away rather than conform to unit 1 (or any other move). 

1111
1111
. . . .BBBB
. . . .XBBB
Z.O.C

During the wheel, the rear corner (X) of unit B temporarily moves into the ZOC of unit 1. Is this permitted or illegal ??





Answer
The wheel is permitted and it is not blocked by the ZoC.
This uses the same logic for a wheel (see diagram P31) :- the rear of a unit can temporarily overlap another unit during a wheel.

[Zoltan]

It’s worth looking at the adlg Facebook coverage of this question with nice clear diagrams. 

And I guess another point is that the rules do not say you have to literally wheel the unit’s base on the table. In fact, movement distance measurements are done in straight lines between two points. 

So one can simply measure from a front corner to an end point, say “I’m wheeling at the start”, pick the unit up and then plonk it down at the end point on its new (post wheel) orientation, without ever appearing to “wheel through the enemy ZoC”.

[lionelrus]

Yes Zltlan, but ALL rulesabout ZOC applies during the move, so you can't moving in and out a zoc when moving.
_________________
"Quand on a pas de technique, faut y aller à la zob"
Perceval à Yvain et Gauvain.

[Ramses II]

Lionelrus, I think you may have missed the point. In the diagram P31, the rear of the unit temporarily passes across a neighbouring unit. El Kreator has agreed that we treat enemy ZoC in the same way. 

However, I agree that it is illegal for the front edge of a unit to pass through the enemy ZoC. 

[Za Otlichiye]

Unfortunately, this interpretation creates a bit of dilemma if the unit starts with part of a rear corner in an enemy ZoC. May it wheel (or otherwise move) out of the ZoC?

[Longtooth]

[Zoltan]

[Za Otlichiye]

Uh Z, that is my point.
I'm with Lionelrus on this one.

If you are saying M. Caille answered this on a Facebook group, I'm kind of ticked. I'd really like to get simple answers to simple questions without Meta tracking me...
[Took a look and my concerns are a bit overblown...]

[Zoltan]

[SteveR]

The answer is clear, however I am concerned about the implications of the answer.

Herve says "This uses the same logic for a wheel (see diagram P31) :- the rear of a unit can temporarily overlap another unit during a wheel."

However page 31 specifies that the rear of a unit can only temporarily overlap a FRIENDLY unit. So I have never allowed impetuous units to overlap enemy units by wheeling when they are in a gap.

But if a unit can wheel their rear through a ZOC why would they not also be able to temporarily overlap enemy? Especially given the wording chosen.

[Ramses II]

Steve, I am not sure there is a problem here. If anything, the text on P31 might need to be revised to come into line with the principle that El Kreator is describing.

The point is that we are using a solid shape (a base) to represent the fluid movement of a group of several hundred soldiers or cavalry. Obviously the rearmost men are not actually sliding sideways as the leading men wheel. Consequently they do not move across any other troops (friendly or enemy) or across the front 'danger zone' of enemy troops.

[SteveR]

I dont think it is a huge issue or even a problem necessarily. But it does represent a change, at least from my understanding.

In a wheel overlapping friends is explicitly allowed.

In a wheel having part of your base move through a ZOC is now allowed per the clarification.

You seem to agree with me that temporarily overlapping an enemy unit in a wheel seems also to be allowed. This might be good - it allows troops to get into combat now in situations where they would previously been restricted. It also allows unmaneuverable troops in a gap to wheel into flank contact and not have to pay for a turn. This is a bit of a boost for impetuous types but does not break the game.

However it is dangerous to extrapolate in ADLG - the author is comfortable with rules that are situational and reasoning by analogy is dangerous. I am not sure this is what he necessarily wants. But if he does not a clarification of the clarification will be needed because the way he expressed it sure sounds like it.

The "fluid movement" rationalization is even more dangerous to adopt as a general principle although it might let my war wagons in column wheel further - since the tail end of the column is not really swinging through that arc and all

[Za Otlichiye]

If you can make contact, you can Conform, which doesn't seem to have much physical constraints.

[hcaille]

Hello

The question was related to a very particular case : units are in corner corner contact and perfectly aligned.
The active unit have to move otherwise it have to conform to the enemy
In this case, it is authorized to the unit to move by wheeling in order to remove the contact with the enemy.
It seems logical that this unit not in ZoC can move without entering in the ZoC.

Do not extrapolate than it is possible to overlap enemy unit.
This kind of move is not authorized

[Za Otlichiye]

It is necessary to be a wet blanket on this one.
Looking at the diagram on Facebook, not only does the rear corner enter the ZoC. but the whole side overlaps the enemy unit. Can't escape geometry.
Unit A, at least in the diagram, has the option to slide, wheel and advance a UD, or ¼ turn, wheel and advance. Either should be pretty sufficient.
This situation needs further consideration.

NB: Unit A in the Facebook diagram corresponds to Unit 1 in the OP of this thread.