Art De La Guerre

[Three]

I've had a search through the RQs sub forum, and haven't seen this query explicitly asked, despite ZOCs being regularly featured. This thread is the closest -

http://www.artdelaguerre.fr/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4020

The situation is as follows - Pike unit facing down has a friendly MC unit on it's rear right, also facing down and at approx. 30 degree angle to the pike's front.

Opponent (phasing player) has a block of 2 MI swords/Impact facing up. The MI are behind the pike's front edge, so are legal to flank charge with at least 1 of the MI units.

The MC behind the pike have both MI units in its ZOC, the one closest to the pike by a fraction and the other almost completely to the MC's front.

We decided that -

1) If the phasing player firstly elects to charge the MI unit closest to the pike into its flank, then this is prevented because of the ZOC of the MC, even if the other MI unit subsequently charges the MC?

2) However, if the phasing player elects to firstly charge the MI mostly in front of the MC into it, this puts the MC into melee and therefore cancels the MC's ZOC, and the MI closest to the pike is therefore allowed to flank charge the pike unit?

Did we get it right?

[madaxeman]

To paraphrase the latest FAQ, you can't charge through a ZOC to hit another unit. Protecting flanks like this is one of the key things that ZOC's do.

Once a unit is in combat it no longer exerts a ZOC.

So, sounds like you are right
_________________
www.madaxeman.com

[daveallen]

Except that if the MI hits the MC it will have to conform. It will do this by shifting the other MI out of the way.

If a unit is shifted in order to allow a conform it cannot make a further move in that phase.

Don't have rules with me, but it's in there somewhere
_________________
Putting the ink into incompetence

[Longtooth]

Hi Dave,

It's not explicitly mentioned in the rules, but is stated in the technical committee forum.

Jesse

[AlanCutner]

Confused by that last answer. Is it in the FAQ or amendments? r is there forum thread with a technical committee ruling? Don't see why anything else counts.

Saying this as a sometimes umpire. Its hard to make a ruling without something clear to refer to.

[Longtooth]

Alan,

It was originally announced on the ADLG technical forum but is also included on the official list of amendments which relate to page 53.

http://www.artdelaguerre.fr/download/FAQ/Official%20amendements%20for%20L%E2%80%99Art%20de%20la%20Guerre%20Rules.pdf

Jesse

[Three]

[daveallen]

[Three]

[daveallen]

Edit to Add

Sorry about that. It's standard on more fractious forums where you're likely to have your words thrown back at you. Probably unnecessary here.
_________________
Putting the ink into incompetence

[Three]

Got you, no worries.