Still playing through test Pacto games. I wanted to confirm that I'm playing this situation correctly. The knights TuG charges 2 TuGs of billmen, making contact with one of them. In the charge phase, no hits are scored.
Then in melee, even with no alignment moves, does the 2nd TuG of billmen get to fight in support? It is within 1BW, it is aligned with the friendly TuG that is actually fighting, and if the knights aligned, it would be in contact. So I'm going with yes, it gets to fight in support (even though it's not in actual contact.)
As a follow up question, if the Billmen TuG chooses to align with the kinghts, and breaks formation with the supporting TuG, would that supporting TuG still provide a support die? or would that no longer happen given that it would no longer be aligned?
Or would both Billmen TuGs get to align to the knights and keep formation?
Thanks!
[attachment deleted by admin]
First the phasing player decides if he wants to conform or not.
Shiould the charging knights decide to conform, things are easy as the second billmen unit would be able to fight in overlap or move 90° to fight the knights on their flank .
If no one conforms ( the best solution for the knights ), melee will take place as if conformed, so one billmen unit fights the knigths and the other fights as an overlap .
The contacted billmen can conform to the knights but looses the help of the other billmen unit unless that units moves to the help of the first unit during movement phase .
Thank you that makes sense.
And let me just play this out and confirm what could happen.
Assume no one conforms or breaks melee. Next turn's charge phase, the second billmen unit charges the knights to get into full contact. It ends up touching the side edge of the knights, but does not get a flank charge bonus because they started in front of the knights.
Then in the melee phase, because they are touching the side of the knights, they would get a flank melee bonus.
Is this right?
The contact would be frontal ( considered frontal anyway ) . No one can conform .
During melee you would have to choose one billmen unit to fight with the other being considered in support . You can choose one or the other.
If the knights are phasing, they b-get to choose which TUG they fight , the other being a supporting file .
Hope I am clear
I would have also thought the second billmen unit would get the flank modifier in the fighting phase (but not in charge combat) imagining that it wheeled and charged the side edge of the knights in the charge phase.
Whether a fight qualifies as a flank combat is determined in the charge and I don't believe you can claim it as a flank combat in any subsequent fighting phase - the rules on aligning specifically prohibit it for e.g. and if cannot happen then I don't see it would in other circumstances.
Correct. You align as a supporting file if you were not in a position to claim the +4.
Remember these are wooden bases not real troops so there is a line over which there was a real advantage. In real life there is a point behind which the defenders could not reasonbly react and a point before where they could. So I take ti to be that attacks that start from the front give sufficient reaction time to allow a reaction to minimise the damage.
While the chaps on the flank would wrap around to a degree the defending rear ranks would in reality spread out to face them to a degree while they attacked. So the abstraction line has been drawn at whether you get a flank charge initially after which the flank melee would also be chaos to a degree.
Quote from: dcoltman on November 03, 2020, 06:08:23 PM
I would have also thought the second billmen unit would get the flank modifier in the fighting phase (but not in charge combat) imagining that it wheeled and charged the side edge of the knights in the charge phase.
To have the flank charge bonus, the charge must begin in the flank . The front of your base must already be behind de front of the target .Look at PG 121 and 122 .
What you can do with a supporting file is move a M9 and turn in the flank but it is not a charge and will give effects in melee ( pg 132, M 2.2 )
This has been helpful for me to understand the mechanics (I now better understand how the charge flank dynamics carry over into subsequent fighting phases) - so if you would be so kind, I wonder how this should optimally work out for the billmen? Bear with me as I have been trying to learn the game by myself. Let billmen1 be the UG charged by the knights and billmen2 be the neighbouring UG.
If billmen1 align to the charging knights (SP2.7), billmen2 would remain in position, out of contact and support, and would have to prompted move into an overlap contact corner to corner or side edge position in the movement phase to provide support in the fighting phase. In a subsequent move, billmen2 from overlap could wheel or turn to gain +2 flank bonus on the knights in a subsequent fighting phase (per p 132).
If billmen1 do not align the the charging knights, billmen2 would provide overlap support in the ensuing fighting phase if they do not move. Alternately, could billmen2 prompted move into a position to flank charge in the following charge phase by moving their front edge to a position past the front edge of the knights (assuming they did not start their move in the close proximity zone of the knights - which begs another unrelated question - is the close prox zone 1BW in pacto or is it 1/2BW)?
In either case, what have I missed, and how would an experienced billmen player play this out? As an ex-DBA player, my instinct would be the first option to align to the charge, move the support to overlap then move to "shut the door" in the second turn.
Thanks everyone for your time and patience - and I apologize if this reply sidetracks the thread.
Ok, so let me verify that the attached movement is strictly not allowed.
Billmen 2 declare a charge, then wheel and contact the flank of the knights. No +4 bonus. But in melee +2 flank bonus.
Instead of the above, if charging, they must charge the front of the knights because they start in front of the knights. They can't because there is no room, so no charge allowed.
So they can either stay still and support or move to get to the side of the knights and then possibly charge on the next turn.
[attachment deleted by admin]
QuoteThis has been helpful for me to understand the mechanics (I now better understand how the charge flank dynamics carry over into subsequent fighting phases) - so if you would be so kind, I wonder how this should optimally work out for the billmen?
Always happy to help and often simpler than people try to make it.
QuoteBear with me as I have been trying to learn the game by myself. Let billmen1 be the UG charged by the knights and billmen2 be the neighbouring UG.
First difference perhaps is that you don't need to align for bellmen 2 to be a neighbouring file - it is already. Troops fight as if aligned with a principle of getting maximum bases fighting.
QuoteIf billmen1 align to the charging knights (SP2.7), billmen2 would remain in position, out of contact and support, and would have to prompted move into an overlap contact corner to corner or side edge position in the movement phase to provide support in the fighting phase.
If the neighbouring UG can align with a 1/2 BW universal shift it can go with them. See common questions section in the authors zone. Otherwise yes.
QuoteIn a subsequent move, billmen2 from overlap could wheel or turn to gain +2 flank bonus on the knights in a subsequent fighting phase (per p 132).
Yes exactly so given a bit of time on an open flank you can exploit it.
QuoteIf billmen1 do not align the the charging knights, billmen2 would provide overlap support in the ensuing fighting phase if they do not move.
Exactly so.
QuoteAlternately, could billmen2 prompted move into a position to flank charge in the following charge phase by moving their front edge to a position past the front edge of the knights (assuming they did not start their move in the close proximity zone of the knights - which begs another unrelated question - is the close prox zone 1BW in pacto or is it 1/2BW)?
Well its 1 BW but 1 base width is 20mm. Essentially Pacto halves all the distances so our single file UGs are really representing 2BW x 2 deep.
QuoteIn either case, what have I missed, and how would an experienced billmen player play this out? As an ex-DBA player, my instinct would be the first option to align to the charge, move the support to overlap then move to "shut the door" in the second turn.
Nothing much it seems. You've got it 90% already. If there was nothing in the way I would love those bellmen where they are and wheel the UGs on the left round their flank. Other wise do as you say. Align this time and seek to wrap the flank next time. The Knight commander clearly needs to try to break off to save embarrassment.
QuoteThanks everyone for your time and patience - and I apologize if this reply sidetracks the thread.
A pleasure. Keep enjoying and spread the good purple news.
Si
Quote from: AshTheKing001 on November 05, 2020, 02:58:04 AM
Ok, so let me verify that the attached movement is strictly not allowed.
Billmen 2 declare a charge, then wheel and contact the flank of the knights. No +4 bonus. But in melee +2 flank bonus.
As I posted above I don't believe they get the +2 flank claim in the fighting phase. I
think Si agrees, but as he answered in terms of aligning it is not wholly clear.
Quote
Instead of the above, if charging, they must charge the front of the knights because they start in front of the knights. They can't because there is no room, so no charge allowed.
You do not need to charge the front of the knights in this situation. Although they are not in a position to get the +4 flank claim they can still charge the knights, hitting their side edge, but is then resolved as if it were a frontal contact (diagram at bottom of page 137 mentions this and the no aligning into a flank position I mentioned previously).
Quote from: nikgaukroger on November 05, 2020, 07:50:35 AM
Quote from: AshTheKing001 on November 05, 2020, 02:58:04 AM
Ok, so let me verify that the attached movement is strictly not allowed.
Billmen 2 declare a charge, then wheel and contact the flank of the knights. No +4 bonus. But in melee +2 flank bonus.
As I posted above I don't believe they get the +2 flank claim in the fighting phase. I think Si agrees, but as he answered in terms of aligning it is not wholly clear.
Quote
Instead of the above, if charging, they must charge the front of the knights because they start in front of the knights. They can't because there is no room, so no charge allowed.
You do not need to charge the front of the knights in this situation. Although they are not in a position to get the +4 flank claim they can still charge the knights, hitting their side edge, but is then resolved as if it were a frontal contact (diagram at bottom of page 137 mentions this and the no aligning into a flank position I mentioned previously).
Yes I was referring ton the alignment situation. But once aligned the situation becomes as per the situation in the book on page 132 whereby the move AFTER the UG on the side could wheel into the open flank, cards allowing.
S
Quote from: Simon Meg-Meister on November 06, 2020, 06:15:10 AM
Yes I was referring ton the alignment situation. But once aligned the situation becomes as per the situation in the book on page 132 whereby the move AFTER the UG on the side could wheel into the open flank, cards allowing.
S
What I think the poster I replied to would find useful is if you could comment on the situation where a charge hits a side edge but
does not qualify for the +4 flank claim and then
does not align - the poster was saying they though that in the subsequent fighting phase that they would then be able to claim the +2 flank claim as they were in contact with the flank. I don't think that is the case. Over to you 8)
I though I had already done so... but to be Clare not you never do unless you got the +4 originally. You always go to a supporting file position.
Then over time you may eventually to the positions shown on page 132 and make one of the moves there.
Si
Quote from: Simon Meg-Meister on November 07, 2020, 05:12:03 PM
I though I had already done so... but to be Clare not you never do unless you got the +4 originally. You always go to a supporting file position.
Then over time you may eventually to the positions shown on page 132 and make one of the moves there.
Si
I appreciate everyone's patience in explaining this. Ok so the key point that I think I was missing is that in my second example, billmen2, charging from the front of the knights end up as "supporting" files because they started in the front of the knights, and the knights are already engaged from the front. So they wouldn't generate a charge outcome (get to roll a charge die). In subsequent melee they would be a "supporting" file. Then in a subsequent move, they could wheel to full front edge to side edge contact and follow the diagram on page 132.
As a side note, I think a couple of Pacto diagrams showing some of these trickier interactions, like multi UG charges, alignments and contacts would be very helpful. I know the principles with Maximus are the same, but in practice how the bases end up interacting is a bit different.
Glad to have been able to help
Glad it makes sense. Once I get through the WW2 crunch I'll see if I can do a few more videos and diagram sets.
S