Auteur |
Message |
Hazelbark
Magister Militum
Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014 Messages: 1550
|
Posté le: Lun Avr 08, 2019 10:21 pm Sujet du message: |
|
AlanCutner a écrit: |
I think the TB ruling has complicated things and is a mistake. |
I fear so. And possibly rushed. |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
ethan
Signifer
Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014 Messages: 347
|
Posté le: Mar Avr 09, 2019 11:22 am Sujet du message: |
|
Yeah this has some major implications for game play and will significantly advantage more expensive troops actually... |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Zoltan
Centurion
Inscrit le: 18 Jan 2015 Messages: 445
Localisation: Wellington, New Zealand
|
Posté le: Mer Avr 10, 2019 3:11 am Sujet du message: |
|
So doesn't look like this DT ruling has made it into the just-released FAQ. |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Black Prince
Prétorien
Inscrit le: 17 Oct 2016 Messages: 291
|
Posté le: Mer Avr 10, 2019 7:49 am Sujet du message: |
|
How often would you move through a 1UD gap if one of the enemy units is not in melee or threaten with a charge? If I moved into a gap which had a loose enemy unit on one side I would be concerned about being charge in the flank or am I missing something? |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
AlanCutner
Tribun
Inscrit le: 03 Nov 2014 Messages: 716
Localisation: Scotland
|
Posté le: Mer Avr 10, 2019 8:45 am Sujet du message: |
|
Black Prince a écrit: | How often would you move through a 1UD gap if one of the enemy units is not in melee or threaten with a charge? If I moved into a gap which had a loose enemy unit on one side I would be concerned about being charge in the flank or am I missing something? |
There are situations this could occur
1. An impetuous unit pursues into the gap.
2. Being hit in the flank by that particular unit may be preferable to being hit by an enemy to its rear (the pursuit takes it out of reach of the rearward unit).
3. Further tactical situations .........
However the owner of the flanking unit may prefer to attack a different unit its not in contact with, eg. the flank of an enemy included general on the other side. Does it have the choice? |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Zoltan
Centurion
Inscrit le: 18 Jan 2015 Messages: 445
Localisation: Wellington, New Zealand
|
Posté le: Mer Avr 10, 2019 9:00 am Sujet du message: |
|
FAQ p.9 does have 3 examples showing when you can/can’t enter or move through the gap. Unfortunately, example 3 appears to still contain an error from the previous version. A1 can NOT conform onto the flank of B2, as (unlike with B1) it does not start behind B2’s front edge.
Are you thinking what I’m thinking?
😏 |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
AlanCutner
Tribun
Inscrit le: 03 Nov 2014 Messages: 716
Localisation: Scotland
|
Posté le: Mer Avr 10, 2019 1:20 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Great shame the ruling on this didn't make it into the FAQ. We could really do with some further clarification with some urgency. Or, in my view, a reversal of the TB ruling. |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Longtooth
Signifer
Inscrit le: 14 Oct 2014 Messages: 350
Localisation: Oxford
|
Posté le: Mer Avr 10, 2019 8:20 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Hi Alan,
Was this issue not already cleared up on 01 September 2018? Refer to page 9 of the most recent FAQ.
Jesse |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Zoltan
Centurion
Inscrit le: 18 Jan 2015 Messages: 445
Localisation: Wellington, New Zealand
|
Posté le: Mer Avr 10, 2019 10:17 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Longtooth a écrit: | Hi Alan,
Was this issue not already cleared up on 01 September 2018? Refer to page 9 of the most recent FAQ.
Jesse |
Hi Jesse
I can't see anything on FAQ p.9 that clarifies the situation Alan gave at the start of this post and the subsequent TD ruling recorded in this thread on 1 April. This is probably simply a timing issue on getting the latest FAQ (as at 31 March) translated and published. |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Hazelbark
Magister Militum
Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014 Messages: 1550
|
Posté le: Mer Avr 10, 2019 10:37 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Zoltan a écrit: | FAQ p.9 does have 3 examples showing when you can/can’t enter or move through the gap. Unfortunately, example 3 appears to still contain an error from the previous version. A1 can NOT conform onto the flank of B2, as (unlike with B1) it does not start behind B2’s front edge.
|
This I have learned was a translation problem as the French draft is clear. the DT is aware of this. |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
Hazelbark
Magister Militum
Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014 Messages: 1550
|
Posté le: Mer Avr 10, 2019 10:40 pm Sujet du message: |
|
AlanCutner a écrit: | Great shame the ruling on this didn't make it into the FAQ. We could really do with some further clarification with some urgency. Or, in my view, a reversal of the TB ruling. |
There are a few issues I have heard of.
The DT had finalized the draft of the FAQ before this issue came up.
There is a danger of too rapid FAQ changes.
Key members of the DT are travelling right now.
So revert to the prime directive. Stop being a Barkerese rule lawyer and go back to having fun. This I hope will be addressed in due course, in the fullness of time. |
|
Revenir en haut de page |
|
|
|