Another gem that came up from Kubla Con.
In the fight below, UG B (red) hits UG A (blue) at an angle, but does not qualify for a flank attack, so all attacks are frontal. UG A are devastating chargers. Base A1b (rear base) elects to fight file B2 and not support the base ahead of it.
(https://i.imgur.com/KaDBY6E.png)
The first question that arose (and I promised to ask on the forums): do either bases in file A1 get the +1 DC bonus?
I think this is a pretty easy "no". They are fighting different fights and simply being 2 ranks deep isn't enough to get the bonus - you need both ranks fighting the same opponent - and this is how we played it.
(Now watch me be completely wrong on the 'easy' question.)
The second question was: if base A1a (or A1b) fights first and gets a skull/S, does base A1b (or A1a) get the +2 shatter bonus? You don't need 2 ranks for the shatter bonus, but you do need to be a "neighboring file". Is base A1a a neighboring file to A1b and vice-versa in this situation? We played that they were, and indeed the rear base was awarded a +2 bonus when A1a rolled a skull, but now I really wonder if that was correct. It's pretty clear from the rules as written that A1a/A1b belong to the same file, and it seems a bit of a stretch of the English language to say that they are neighboring files for this combat - but the consensus at the time was that it was in the spirit of the rules that the second base could benefit from a shatter/shove generated by the base ahead of it.
The third question was: could either UG align to the other? We played that they could not, mostly because we were fixated on the inability of base A1b (rear base) to align with the center file of UG B, but I think we got this wrong as well. You can't align out of flank/rear combat, but all fighting files are in frontal combat. You also can't align out of fighting a UG (with an obscure exception that doesn't apply here) but the UGs would still be fighting after alignment, although instead of two frontal combats there would only be one - but that doesn't seem to matter. So at this point I don't see why UG A couldn't align to B:
(https://i.imgur.com/89z4rjg.png)
I also think that it might be legal for UG B to align to A:
(https://i.imgur.com/nt4w6Ui.png)
(or is this how you would align? Maybe you would align such that the center file remains stepped forward as it does in the previous diagram?? The rules do say, "no rearrangement of positions within a formation is allowed".)
Note that if UG B aligns to A, the front base of the center file moves more than 1 BW (but not more than 2), but I think that's allowed since it doesn't end up in combat - only front bases of files that end up in combat are restricted to 1 BW of movement. (This was discussed on the forums awhile back.)
If either can align - note that you could align before charge combat - turning what initially looks like 2 files worth of combat into only 1 combat - so it's likely that one or the other UG would elect to do this based on who has the advantage, and it might well be to UG A's advantage to do so simply to get the DC bonus in their combat.
But likely I've hashed something up somewhere - be gentle in you admonishments. :P
I think your analysis is pretty accurate.
1. I would agree that neither base in A1 gets the +1 DC bonus.
2. I agree it is difficult to suggest that A1b is a neighbouring file to A1a so that a strict interpretation of the rules wouldn''t permit the shatter bonus. That said, as an umpire I would probably treat the combat as if A1a was aligned to B1 and A1b was aligned to B2 and so might allow it.
3. I think A can align to B. By a strict interpretation of the rules I am not sure B can align to A because files are not supposed to move more than 1BW. However, again as an umpire, I interpret this restriction as being there to prevent shifting more than one file (BW) sideways so I would allow it. There is nothing in the rules that says the number of combats after aligning has to be the same as before aligning.
Richard