Neep
Prétorien
Inscrit le: 09 Jan 2023 Messages: 298
|
Posté le: Mer Oct 16, 2024 11:04 pm Sujet du message: Patrick Lefebvre's official(?) interpretations |
|
Patrick Lefebvre has placed a well illustrated set of interpretations that appear to be blessed on the French rules forum. I'm opening this thread for discussion. |
|
KevinD
Légat
Inscrit le: 23 Aoû 2021 Messages: 647
Localisation: Texas
|
|
Neep
Prétorien
Inscrit le: 09 Jan 2023 Messages: 298
|
Posté le: Mer Oct 16, 2024 11:19 pm Sujet du message: |
|
KevinD a écrit: | What a can of worms….
P 3 seems to imply that a unit in an enemy ZOC who exits the ZOC has a choice of going directly to its rear OR directly away from the threatening unit’s facing.
P 9 covers this case in this topic but turns on a word missing from the English rules.
P13 Evades and sliding to avoid difficult terrain seems wrong.
P 6 & P16 - the contradiction where striking the side and conforming to the front is allowed in P 16 during pursuit but not on P 6 in a charge is… interesting. |
P 3 - I think it's implied that Exit-Evade can only be done one unit at a time, so it's not unreasonable to align with the MTE.
P 9 - Yeah may have to buy a French copy...
p13 - The operative word here is "seems". With a dormant rules committee, we are pretty much at the mercy of the author's timeline. That said, the tentative answers in English have been quite consistent.
p 6 & 16 You can't really avoid the situation in pursuit, so it's not unreasonable. I can't understand why anyone would think Elephants ought to be able to motor around an ongoing melee in order to reach enemy. If that's what you want to do, do it the old fashioned way. Get on their flank in one move. Turn and hit them in another. |
|
Neep
Prétorien
Inscrit le: 09 Jan 2023 Messages: 298
|
Posté le: Jeu Oct 17, 2024 10:19 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Ironically, I was thinking about posting in the errata sticky thread in the hopes of forestalling another lengthy discussion on evasion and penalizing terrain next year. I was going to say it was the consistent position of national referees and rules committee members that evaders could only avoid impassible terrain, enemy troops, and impenetrable friendly troops. Looks like that's off the table. |
|
Ballista
Légionaire
Inscrit le: 15 Jan 2018 Messages: 122
|
Posté le: Jeu Oct 17, 2024 11:24 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Pity there is no English translation.  |
|
Neep
Prétorien
Inscrit le: 09 Jan 2023 Messages: 298
|
Posté le: Jeu Oct 17, 2024 11:33 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Ballista I have no problem in Edge to highlight and run translation on Patrick's text. It's not perfect: charger becomes load; mêlée becomes scrum. But it can do. |
|
Hazelbark
Magister Militum
Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014 Messages: 1669
|
Posté le: Jeu Oct 17, 2024 11:36 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Don't sweat Patrick's document until you see an FAQ.
Listen to your local umpire.
All will be resolved. |
|
Neep
Prétorien
Inscrit le: 09 Jan 2023 Messages: 298
|
Posté le: Ven Oct 18, 2024 8:38 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Yikes! I just realized Patrick posted it back at the end of May! |
|
Neep
Prétorien
Inscrit le: 09 Jan 2023 Messages: 298
|
Posté le: Sam Oct 19, 2024 2:42 am Sujet du message: |
|
I've looked at translations of Patrick's interpretations. I believe there are only five that are "new" in any sense. Two of those were incorporated into the errata and the other three I find ambiguous myself.
Units of a group starting in charge distance can engage in melee. Other units can provide support if they can reach support position with an extra 1UD. Now in errata.
A pursuing unit that strikes an enemy flank will conform into simple support if the enemy is in melee, or onto the front edge if it is not. Now in errata
The much-discussed resolution of impetuous units with friends in front facing enemy evaders before static foes.
The treatment of penalizing terrain as an obstacle to evaders if 1 UD or more distant.
Aligning an evade-capable unit exiting a ZoC parallel to the front edge of the MTE. |
|