Auteur |
Message |
KevinD
Légat
Inscrit le: 23 Aoû 2021 Messages: 646
Localisation: Texas
|
Posté le: Sam Aoû 24, 2024 4:16 am Sujet du message: |
|
I agree with you Zoltan that this is how the rule should work. I’m just not sure that that’s how it does work. |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
SteveR
Signifer
Inscrit le: 21 Mar 2018 Messages: 369
|
Posté le: Mer Aoû 28, 2024 11:14 am Sujet du message: |
|
“As soon as the conformer enters a ZoC the p.52 errata then kicks in: although you MUST conform with A, you’re also now in B’s ZoC which takes priorityâ€
No.  Unit A’s ZOC takes priority.  Both A and B are in front of the wheeling unit and A is closer |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Ramses II
Magister Militum

Inscrit le: 17 Juil 2015 Messages: 1235
Localisation: London
|
Posté le: Mer Aoû 28, 2024 2:53 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Guys, this has already been answered here-
http://www.artdelaguerre.fr/adlg/v3/forum/viewtopic.php?t=9598&highlight=conform%2A
- Assuming it does not move elsewhere, unit 1 must conform on unit A because it is in corner-to-corner contact (50,1st bullet)
- Unit 1 does not start in the ZoC of B since there was an intervening unit. Nor is unit 1 in the ZoC of A. Â
- P35 MTE means that in conforming, unit 1 must respect the ZoC of A. (1 only needs to respect B if conform on a flank or rear, which is not the case here.)
- After conformation Unit 1 will be in combat with multiple enemies, so suffers the usual consequences.
- This same situation would be true if unit 1 had moved into corner contact; it would still conform on A with the same consequences.
Dernière édition par Ramses II le Mer Aoû 28, 2024 7:10 pm; édité 1 fois |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Neep
Prétorien
Inscrit le: 09 Jan 2023 Messages: 298
|
Posté le: Mer Aoû 28, 2024 4:48 pm Sujet du message: |
|
There are two issues here getting a bit jumbled. What is the technically correct conformance in the example given the current rules? and Should a unit be forced to conform into an unfavorable position?
Impetuous units do not make uncontrolled charges into flanked positions, and certainly a rule could be added to avoid the same thing when resolving non-melee contact. Note that without such rules a player could set up an impetuous trap, but non-melee contact is pretty random. |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Ramses II
Magister Militum

Inscrit le: 17 Juil 2015 Messages: 1235
Localisation: London
|
Posté le: Mer Aoû 28, 2024 8:09 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Neep a écrit: | There are two issues here getting a bit jumbled. What is the technically correct conformance in the example given the current rules? and Should a unit be forced to conform into an unfavorable position?
|
As noted in the earlier thread, unless it moves away, unit 1 must conform to the front of unit A.
And while a unit that voluntarily moves into such a position must conform as indicated, you are correct that it would be the choice of the player as impetuous troops are not compelled to do so. |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Zoltan
Légat
Inscrit le: 18 Jan 2015 Messages: 500
Localisation: Wellington, New Zealand
|
Posté le: Jeu Aoû 29, 2024 2:13 am Sujet du message: |
|
Ramses II a écrit: | Neep a écrit: | There are two issues here getting a bit jumbled. What is the technically correct conformance in the example given the current rules? and Should a unit be forced to conform into an unfavorable position?
|
As noted in the earlier thread, unless it moves away, unit 1 must conform to the front of unit A.
And while a unit that voluntarily moves into such a position must conform as indicated, you are correct that it would be the choice of the player as impetuous troops are not compelled to do so. |
You appear to be giving impetuous units an opt-out of conforming into an unfavourable position but insisting that non-impetuous units MUST conform into an unfavourable position. This seems totally counter-intuitive to me. |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Ramses II
Magister Militum

Inscrit le: 17 Juil 2015 Messages: 1235
Localisation: London
|
Posté le: Jeu Aoû 29, 2024 10:09 am Sujet du message: |
|
Not quite Zoltan.Â
Two situations -
- Where any unit starts in corner contact and does not move away, it must conform into an unfavorable position irrespective of whether it is impetuous or not.Â
- Where a unit is some distance away, it may choose not to move into this position irrespective of whether it is impetuous or not, but if it does then it will conform into an unfavorable position.Â
|
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Neep
Prétorien
Inscrit le: 09 Jan 2023 Messages: 298
|
Posté le: Jeu Aoû 29, 2024 2:29 pm Sujet du message: |
|
As I understand it, an impetuous unit never has a choice about making an uncontrolled charge - either it is provoked, or an exception prevents it. So if a target would cause it to end in a flanked position, the target is no longer a target. (But the would-be flanker might be.-) |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Zoltan
Légat
Inscrit le: 18 Jan 2015 Messages: 500
Localisation: Wellington, New Zealand
|
Posté le: Jeu Aoû 29, 2024 10:25 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Neep a écrit: | As I understand it, an impetuous unit never has a choice about making an uncontrolled charge - either it is provoked, or an exception prevents it. So if a target would cause it to end in a flanked position, the target is no longer a target. (But the would-be flanker might be.-) |
Agreed. But to be pedantic:
1. An impetuous unit is not "required" to make an Uncontrolled Charge if it would end in a position with an enemy on its flank,
2. Of course an impetuous unit could "choose" to pay CP to make a charge, or indeed make a Spontaneous Charge, into a position with an enemy on its flank.
i.e. the target could still be a target, in certain (probably infrequent) situations.  |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
|