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
arc of shooting
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 > Question sur la règle V4
Auteur Message
navigator
Archer


Inscrit le: 09 Sep 2018
Messages: 68
Localisation: robin hoods bay UK
MessagePosté le: Jeu Mar 16, 2023 10:36 am    Sujet du message: arc of shooting Répondre en citant
Apologies but my lap top does not show the english forum any more.


I dont know how to place a photograph in here

If a target unit for a bowman is offset to the side and is exactly one UD width to the side of the bowmen, can a bow unit shoot at the enemy? (so that it is the front corner and side edge of the target that is exactly 1UDwidth away from the bowman)

If so does this mean that a row of 5 bowmen can all shoot (rules permitted) at an enemy unit exactly lined up centrally against the middle bowman?

thank you and sorry to cause any confusion

[/img][/quote]
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
madaxeman
Magister Militum


Inscrit le: 01 Nov 2014
Messages: 1462
Localisation: Londres Centraal.
MessagePosté le: Jeu Mar 16, 2023 10:57 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
navigator a écrit:
Apologies but my lap top does not show the english forum any more.


I dont know how to place a photograph in here

If a target unit for a bowman is offset to the side and is exactly one UD width to the side of the bowmen, can a bow unit shoot at the enemy? (so that it is the front corner and side edge of the target that is exactly 1UDwidth away from the bowman)

If so does this mean that a row of 5 bowmen can all shoot (rules permitted) at an enemy unit exactly lined up centrally against the middle bowman?

thank you and sorry to cause any confusion

[/img]
[/quote]

This was discussed on the Facebook group this week, and as part of that thread Paul Johnson gave what looks to be a definitive reply, supporting his view by citing the wording of the rules (ie "within its shooting zone").

His post and justification was as follows:



Seems clear to me .[/img]
_________________
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
Ramses II
Magister Militum


Inscrit le: 17 Juil 2015
Messages: 1160
Localisation: London
MessagePosté le: Sam Mar 18, 2023 1:54 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
I don’t think this is possible for several reasons. To illustrate the issue, units 1-5 wish to shoot at an enemy unit completely aligned with unit 3. 

Shooting zone and range (P57) says that a target must be within the zone and range; being “at†1UD to one side is not “within†the side arc.
So IMO units 2,3 & 4 can shoot at a target opposite unit 3, but the target is not within the arcs of units 1 & 5

Also note there is a limit to the support bonus of +3 
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Neep
Légionaire


Inscrit le: 09 Jan 2023
Messages: 124
MessagePosté le: Sam Mar 18, 2023 10:05 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
There can be no definitive answer, because the rules eschew formal definitions. If the range and zone are checked against the same point then all 5 bow can target the enemy. If you check whether some of the target's base area intersects the zone, then you get a different answer. This is a natural reading, but beware that if the point you measure range to is not within the intersected area, you can get some wacky situations. (And then there is the question of what point the LOS is traced to...)
Esoteric I know, but if it's not defined and there is argument not consensus, we need a clarification.

BTW, if the target is slightly offset to the left or right, then there is no problem and it's a +3 from 4 units, so it seems quite reasonable to be +3 from 5 units when perfectly aligned.

Apologies to the francophones. And those who hate math. Or maths.
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: Sam Mar 18, 2023 10:59 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Agreed, if the target is not aligned perfectly, then only four units get to shoot / support with a +3 benefit. 

However, I think there is a definitive answer.
The issue raised is whether the extreme end units may provide support. LoS rules are irrelevant to the question as presented - the issue is whether or not the target is within the arc of fire for each unit shooting / supporting.

I contend that being “at†a distance is not “within†the distance. So for example, units may make multiple moves up to 4UD from an enemy because they have not moved ‘within’ tactical distance - and bowmen at 4UD may not shoot because they are out of range.  

By the same token, the side arc extends up to 1UD either side, but the target must be within arc and range. By this definition, the target will not be within arc of the extreme end units, thus the shooters would only gain +2 support if the target is perfectly aligned. 
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
harryKonst
Archer


Inscrit le: 04 Juil 2017
Messages: 63
MessagePosté le: Lun Mar 20, 2023 11:59 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
About Arc of shooting and the answer of Ramses II: We obviously have a difference in translation of the term 'within'. When I was reading rules I always thought within for a distance means at exactly that distance and less than that. But since Greeks is my native language and not English , I looked up at the Oxford Dictionary. There what it says ' (WITHIN.for space; Inside , or not further than a particular area or space. Example; We have always lived within ten miles of the coast. (We have always lived no further than ten miles from the coast).WARNING: Within does not mean the same as in.Within stresses that something is no further than a particular area or space.'
So, when the rule says on page 57:'A unit shoots from its front edge (except in some cases, see below).It may only shoot at a target that is both within range and within its shooting zone.If the target is within the shooting zone but out of range , the shot is not possible.
The shooting range is measured from any point on the front edge of the shooting unit to any point of the target unit.
The shooting zone is a rectangle that extends directly in front of the shooting edge , which is the length of the unit's shooting range and the width of its shooting edge plus 1UD to either side.' , I understand that if an enemy unit contacts the border of the Arc of fire,( front or flank border, with any of its edges or a corner of it) then it is within the arc of fire and can be shot. Under that interpretation of the rule, when opponent units make a march move and stop exactly at 4 UD from bowmen , they get shot. If they are Cavalry they can charge and so on. So, I prefer 5 bowmen to be potentially qualified of shooting an enemy unit most frontal to the central one, (with +3 support at most) than starting sophistries with at and within, which are different and make the game a mess and the players crazy. Smile Anyway an official answer about what to accept would be useful.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Neep
Légionaire


Inscrit le: 09 Jan 2023
Messages: 124
MessagePosté le: Lun Mar 20, 2023 3:18 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
I don't want to belabor the issue, but to share what I know.
The English dictionary definition of "within" a linear measure is "less than or equal to".
For areas, the technical term is "intersection" and "within" is usually used with geographical boundaries, meaning entirely inside or surrounded.
West Berlin was within East Germany. East Germany was within the Soviet Bloc. Germany was not; it was divided.
If this were the intent of the ADLG rules, then we would not need to check range, since being entirely in the arc would mean the unit is in range.
Therefore, it must be an intersection, which can yield an area, a line, or a point. LOS is traced to a point. Range is traced to a point. You avoid some disconcerting oddities if it's all the same point.

For me, the compelling argument is that if the target is almost, but not quite centered in front of your 5 bowmen, it is clearly a +3.
If the target is perfectly aligned, then it should still be a +3, not a +2, because that would otherwise be a disincentive to align, contrary to a fundamental principal of ADLG.
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: Lun Mar 20, 2023 11:24 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Bear in mind it's translated from French.
What was the intention in French?
_________________
Player 747 don't call me Jumbo
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Neep
Légionaire


Inscrit le: 09 Jan 2023
Messages: 124
MessagePosté le: Mar Mar 21, 2023 1:25 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
It would be nice if we could get a volunteer with a French copy to provide excerpts when these sorts of questions arise. Could be inconvenient, of course.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Brave Coeur
Tribun


Inscrit le: 06 Oct 2011
Messages: 773
Localisation: Strasbourg/Paris
MessagePosté le: Jeu Mar 23, 2023 10:15 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Neep a écrit:
It would be nice if we could get a volunteer with a French copy to provide excerpts when these sorts of questions arise. Could be inconvenient, of course.


page 57: "§ Zone et portée de tir.
une unité ... ne peut tirer que sur une cible qui est à la fois à portée de tir et dans sa zone de tir.
...
la zone de tir est un rectangle qui s'étend en face... d'une longueur égale à la portée de tir et de d'une largeur égale au socle ... plus une UD de part et d'autre."

That's why when a target is just on the limit in front of the shooter, it is OK but not when on the limit on the side.

Hope to provide you your answer.
_________________
Space Rookie
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Neep
Légionaire


Inscrit le: 09 Jan 2023
Messages: 124
MessagePosté le: Ven Mar 24, 2023 3:20 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
This brings up an interesting point I missed. The shooting zone for bowmen cuts off at 4UD. Their range does as well. So a target exactly at 4UD is in range and touching the edge of zone. If you allow shooting at 4UD, then you are allowing shooting at a target touching the zone.
Elsewhere the rules are quite clear that touching the 1UD ZoC is _not_ in the ZoC. No similar language about the shooting zone.
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 Mar 24, 2023 9:49 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
Neep, the phrase “ à la fois à portée de tir et dans sa zone de tir. “ is correctly translated into the English rules - where “dans†means “withinâ€.

Brave CÅ“ur is recalling additional text from V3 which read
Citation:
A unit can shoot at a target at maximum range or less    

This entire section of text was rewritten in V4 along with other changes designed to clear up boundary cases. 

So in V4, if you can place a base flat on the table between the firers and the target, then the target is out of range and arc. 

And for our French readers
Attention, la section de texte sur l'Arc de feu a été entièrement réécrite pour éclaircir les "cas limites". Maintenant, tous les tirs doivent être à portée de tir et dans l'arc.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Neep
Légionaire


Inscrit le: 09 Jan 2023
Messages: 124
MessagePosté le: Ven Mar 24, 2023 6:52 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
I have reconsidered.

The 5 bowmen example is compelling, but rather artificial as it requires no other target to be anywhere near. And incentive for the bowmen to avoid alignment is incentive for the target to align. The target is more likely to be moving.

Really the question is how far can the bow reach sideways when the target is really close in. While the difference between 39mm and 41mm is negligible, the alignment bias makes it a question of targeting one file or two files wide.

A easy fix it to make the zones extend indefinitely. Then say the zone must "overlap" the target's base.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
lionelrus
Magister Militum


Inscrit le: 21 Mar 2009
Messages: 4700
Localisation: paris
MessagePosté le: Sam Mar 25, 2023 6:19 pm    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
5 bowmen cannot shot on the same target, the maximum is 1 shooter and 3 supports. No more supports are allowed. So where is the interest?
_________________
"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
harryKonst
Archer


Inscrit le: 04 Juil 2017
Messages: 63
MessagePosté le: Mer Mar 29, 2023 6:56 am    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant
As I understand from the answers, you say that for the Shooting Zone the flanks extend 1UD left and right of the shooting unit, and so its the same like Zone of Control, anything that contacts the flanks, is not within the Shooting Zone and cannot be shot. You accept this 1 UD of extension, like the rule of Zone of Control? Is that it or its my mistake? But if that is what you say, then you are wrong my friends. The rule of Shooting Zone about its width, refers to a whole one UD distance to either side, not a Zone of Control distance to either side. 1 UD is more than Zone of Control, by definition on page 35 where it says exactly that.
So, if we accept that a unit that contacts the flank border of the Shooting Zone of a shooting unit cannot be shot, then the same must happen when it contacts the front border. Therefore the Cavalry at exactly 4 UD from the front of the bowmen, cannot be shot. That's certainly not the rule, of course.
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
  
 Art De La Guerre Index du Forum > Question sur la règle V4
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