Auteur |
Message |
Richard Young
Archer
Inscrit le: 10 Aoû 2015 Messages: 57
|
Posté le: Jeu Jan 18, 2018 9:20 am Sujet du message: Turning on a flank |
|
I know this has come up before somewhere but I would appreciate clarification on these as I get very forgetful these days!
1. A unit of Frankish infantry (heavy swordsmen impetuous) is in front to front contact with a unit of Roman Legionaries (heavy swordsmen impact). Another unit of similar Frankish infantry is in flank to flank contact with the Roman legionaries i.e. in support of his mate.
It is the Franks turn.
The Frankish unit in flank to flank contact does not make an impetuous move as it currently provides flank support. If it wishes to turn on the flank of the Romans then it costs 2 CP. Is this correct?
(If the Roman unit was not in frontal combat then the Frankish unit in flank to flank contact could turn for free. This is not a charge).
2. A unit of Frankish infantry (heavy swordsmen impetuous) is charged for front to front contact by a unit of Saxon Heavy Spearmen. A Saxon light infantry then contacts the flank of the Frankish infantry with its front edge. This does not prevent the impetuous ability of the Franks (see page 17) but just provides support to the Saxon Heavy Spearmen. The Franks then roll for melee at +2 and so do the Saxons, +2. Correct?
3. If a unit of Roman Legionaries (heavy swordsmen impact) was charged by a unit of Frankish infantry (heavy swordsmen impetuous)and then also flank contacted by the front edge of a Frankish light infantry, then the impact of the impetuous Frankish infantry is cancelled but so is the impact of the Roman Legionaries. Correct?
Thank you
Richard |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
babyshark
Légionaire
Inscrit le: 19 Jan 2015 Messages: 136
|
Posté le: Jeu Jan 18, 2018 1:52 pm Sujet du message: |
|
As to item #1: depending on the exact alignment of the side to side contact the second unit of Franks will have to pay either 2 CP (to make a 90 degree turn) or 1 CP (to wheel).
Marc |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Hazelbark
Magister Militum
Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014 Messages: 1669
|
Posté le: Jeu Jan 18, 2018 3:51 pm Sujet du message: Re: Turning on a flank |
|
Richard Young a écrit: |
2. A unit of Frankish infantry (heavy swordsmen impetuous) is charged for front to front contact by a unit of Saxon Heavy Spearmen. A Saxon light infantry then contacts the flank of the Frankish infantry with its front edge. This does not prevent the impetuous ability of the Franks (see page 17) but just provides support to the Saxon Heavy Spearmen. The Franks then roll for melee at +2 and so do the Saxons, +2. Correct?
3. If a unit of Roman Legionaries (heavy swordsmen impact) was charged by a unit of Frankish infantry (heavy swordsmen impetuous)and then also flank contacted by the front edge of a Frankish light infantry, then the impact of the impetuous Frankish infantry is cancelled but so is the impact of the Roman Legionaries. Correct?
|
I don't have my rules, but the Light infantry in the flank cancelling first turn benefits. It is written clearly somewhere before page 59 in the melee section.
So this will cancel the impetuous and such. So your #3 is exactly correct. I forget if it also cancel furious charge. I think it does, but IIRC the reading is clear. |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Maverick2909
Légionaire
Inscrit le: 01 Juil 2017 Messages: 103
Localisation: Oklahoma City, OK
|
Posté le: Jeu Jan 18, 2018 10:08 pm Sujet du message: |
|
SO if turning on a unit when in side to side contact with neither unit having an opponent to their front isn’t a charge, neither unit gets first round bonuses such as impact or furious charge? |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Ramses II
Magister Militum

Inscrit le: 17 Juil 2015 Messages: 1237
Localisation: London
|
Posté le: Ven Jan 19, 2018 11:46 am Sujet du message: |
|
You are talking about something slightly different here.
Hazelbark is referring to p56, attacked on the flank or rear.
- Unit loses 'offensive' abilities and cannot 'furious charge' because both are directional, to the front.
- unit does not cancel out the abilities of the enemy that is fighting it
You are referring to the definition of "charge" p50, that is used elsewhere in the rules.
Since the manoeuvre is not a "charge", neither side benefits from the first round bonuses normally associated with the impetus of speeding into the combat. |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Hazelbark
Magister Militum
Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014 Messages: 1669
|
Posté le: Ven Jan 19, 2018 3:01 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Maverick2909 a écrit: | SO if turning on a unit when in side to side contact with neither unit having an opponent to their front isn’t a charge, neither unit gets first round bonuses such as impact or furious charge? |
correct |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Maverick2909
Légionaire
Inscrit le: 01 Juil 2017 Messages: 103
Localisation: Oklahoma City, OK
|
Posté le: Ven Jan 19, 2018 3:21 pm Sujet du message: |
|
So all that really happens is they would go to a 0 combat factor and my flanking unit would get a +1 to combat. I guess that’s still a pretty decent advantage. Thanks! |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
daveallen
Tribun

Inscrit le: 28 Jan 2016 Messages: 758
Localisation: Rugby & CLWC
|
Posté le: Lun Jan 22, 2018 9:18 am Sujet du message: |
|
So this came up at the weekend more in the sense of "where does it say in the rules?" than "you can't do that!"
[not my games, which were naturally full of gentlemanly discourse and the very idea of questioning another gentleman's motives was anathema]
The first question is:
1) Why does it cost command points (CPs) to conform onto the flank of an engaged enemy?
To quote the rule:
Citation: | Page 59 Multiple Opponents 2nd Paragraph, middle sentences:
It is not necessary for the enemy to make a charge. It can engage the enemy by a simple move, or by conforming if it was already in contact with the unit. |
I can't find where it says that you ever pay CPs to conform. I know it must be in there somewhere, but where?
For the second question we're back in the world of Barkerese.
2) Can a unit in position to conform simply wheel into contact instead of conforming?
As mentioned previously by Marc, the unit can be in a position to conform onto a flank or to wheel onto it. Does it have a choice?
My understanding (hah!) of the conform rule was that where conforming is not compulsory you have three choices - remain in position, move away, or conform. There doesn't seem to be an option to wheel into contact.
From the above rule I took the reference to a simple move to contact an enemy flank (or rear) as being an option that was only available to units not "already in contact." That would be clear if the rule said:
Citation: | It can engage the enemy by a simple move or, if it was already in contact with the unit, by conforming. |
But as the rule stands it's somewhat ambiguous. At least for those of us who can't shake off old habits.
Dave _________________ Putting the ink into incompetence |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Steve Price
Frondeur
Inscrit le: 01 Mar 2017 Messages: 8
|
Posté le: Lun Jan 22, 2018 12:26 pm Sujet du message: |
|
And we thought using Franks would make life easier  |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Hazelbark
Magister Militum
Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014 Messages: 1669
|
Posté le: Lun Jan 22, 2018 4:23 pm Sujet du message: |
|
daveallen a écrit: |
1) Why does it cost command points (CPs) to conform onto the flank of an engaged enemy?
2) Can a unit in position to conform simply wheel into contact instead of conforming?
|
I think you are mixing a few pieces or I am missing your point.
Conforming in effect never costs CP. Now you may conform as a result of spending CP on say a charge. But the conforming is after contact.
Now I think your other table is blurring what to do when in support versus not in support. But maybe I am reading this wrong.
So the conforming situation you specify is p55. "after a melee" It is a specific situation when no one is fighting (front edge to front edge) but they are still in contact. The argument I presume is, if there is a fight and you are in support your troops are not doing anything additional without CP because they are already "in the fight" via support. If no one is in support this is where you get the no CP cost.
So I think your reading of p 59 has sent you on a bit of a snip hunt.
The wheel onto a flank is when a unit is in support and want to quarter turn onto the flank. An impetuous/unmaneuverable unit would cost 2 CP, but via a wheel only 1 CP.
p3 of FAQ
Impetuous unit’s movement
Q : An impetuous unit, that is providing support to another unit in melee, moves less than 1UD but continues to support the same unit. What is the CP cost ? 1, 2 or 3 CPs ?
A : For impetuous units, if the movement ends in contact with the enemy (including support) a partial advance is not considered to be a difficult manoeuvre, so 1CP. |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
daveallen
Tribun

Inscrit le: 28 Jan 2016 Messages: 758
Localisation: Rugby & CLWC
|
Posté le: Lun Jan 22, 2018 6:16 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Hi Dan,
we're maybe thinking at cross purposes a bit here.
Page 55 Conforming after a melee applies to circumstances where the enemy you're conforming on isn't in melee with another unit.
Page 59 Multiple Opponents says you can conform if already in side to side contact or, if not, can make a simple move to engage in the melee.
So the questions are:
1) Is this two different kinds of conforming? Because the first is free and the other costs command points.
2) Can you in fact wheel (and then conform, obviously) if you're already in side to side contact? Because my reading of page 59 (see above) would be that you can't.
Now I know we've all played it that you pay for the conform in a Multiple Opponents situation, and that you can instead opt to wheel if you're in the right position and it would cost less command points*.
But having gone through the rules I'm inclining to the view that either we're playing it wrong, or the rules are wrong (ie translation problems again).
The third option is that I've missed the relevant rule tucked in somewhere inconspicuous.
* Your point about the FAQ for impetuous units explains why you'd save a command point by wheeling onto the flank, although it doesn't permit the wheel as such.
Dave _________________ Putting the ink into incompetence |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Hazelbark
Magister Militum
Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014 Messages: 1669
|
Posté le: Lun Jan 22, 2018 6:32 pm Sujet du message: |
|
So do you think p 59 over-rides page 55?
Because that seems what this argument suggests. I don't think it does. |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Zoltan
Légat
Inscrit le: 18 Jan 2015 Messages: 500
Localisation: Wellington, New Zealand
|
Posté le: Lun Jan 22, 2018 8:43 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Page 55 Conforming - these rules only apply where a previous frontal contact NO LONGER exists "After a rout or disengage move..."
Page 59 - these rules apply where a frontal contact exists. |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
daveallen
Tribun

Inscrit le: 28 Jan 2016 Messages: 758
Localisation: Rugby & CLWC
|
Posté le: Mar Jan 23, 2018 5:03 am Sujet du message: |
|
Hazelbark a écrit: | So do you think p 59 over-rides page 55?
Because that seems what this argument suggests. I don't think it does. |
I think you're missing the point. If there's any primacy it should be with pages 52-55 which set out the rules on conforming in some depth. The reference to conforming on page 59 should therefore follow those rules or explicitly give a variation.
It's not so much one overriding the other, but more like a general principle and a specific application.
What I'm asking is where in the rules does it say you pay command point(s) for one conform and not the other?
As Zoltan says there are two circumstances where conforming to a flank happens - where there's an existing melee and where there isn't. With the latter the only way you can turn that contact into a melee is by conforming. So I don't see why you should get the option of a wheel with the former.
Dave _________________ Putting the ink into incompetence |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Ramses II
Magister Militum

Inscrit le: 17 Juil 2015 Messages: 1237
Localisation: London
|
Posté le: Mar Jan 23, 2018 8:26 am Sujet du message: |
|
Umm, I thought the FAQ went to some lengths to explain that Conformation only took place after movement, actual or implied by circumstances.Â
As such, at the beginning of a turn, a unit may:-- React to a change in the melee in which it is now engaged, if permitted, by Conformation (or evading).
- The player may pay CP to move (or rally) the unit.
If it makes contact with an enemy it must conform. Â - Otherwise
- If the unit is regular it remains stationary.Â
- If the unit is Impetuous and subject to an uncontrolled movement that is not exempted by circumstances or its situation, then the unit moves by itself.Â
I would agree the rules could be better written, but I believe they are intended to be simple, or at least simpler than DBM and the dreaded ‘Barkerese’ referred to.
I think the problem being raised is that similar situations can arise after movement or at the start of a turn that are actually handled differently, depending on how we got to them. - Where there was no change to the situation in the previous player’s turn, the unit cannot conform until the player has paid CP and moved it, even if that means merely turning or wheeling to face a flank.
- Where the enemy in front of the unit was defeated and another is fighting its flank, or it survived an enemy attacking its flank, or some new enemy made contact etc, the unit may react to this situation, if permitted under the rules, by conforming with that enemy (or by evading if able).
|
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
|