Battlewagons finalised - feel free to use but explain in full to any opponents

[vortigernrex]

Hello and welcome 

Thanks - I was a lurker for too long 

[Simon Meg-Meister]

Welcome aboard and good to see you delurking ...

Si

[steads]

Welcome aboard and good to see you delurking ...

Si

"Uncloaking", please! Delurking sounds so tacky and uncloaking has a touch of Imperial elegance or nerdy Trecky cool

[martymagnificent]

One other thing you may want to consider for future classification of BwG is that many of them have polearm but this is not an effective classification for them.

Polearm is quite an expensive weapon because it does quite a few different things but many of these are not applicable/useful for a battlewagon. It cancels a range of mounted factors which you wouldn't get against a battlewagon any way. It gives impact and melee factors against mounted which are probably a bit of a moot point as battlewagons are already strong enough against mounted that only the most desperate would charge them. Against foot it gives an impact factor but (assuming I am reading the QRS correctly) not a melee factor because BwG can't fight in two ranks.

Essentially against the only opponents that you need help against (ie foot) polearm is a whole lot of points for a single impact factor. I would suggest the mixture of melee weapons that accompanied these wagons would probably be better represented by Melee expert.

Martin

[Simon Meg-Meister]

Thanks.
We are pretty proud of how the refined compendium has come out.
What is great is I can't think of a single thing to change right now!

Si

[badhabum]

IWC 2023 will see some ART and some Battlewagons so sometimes a few questions will arrise

From the drawing when the BWG goes from line to column (and vice et versa I suppose), the reference point for redeploying the TUG is the very center of the UG, not one of the "flanks" .

Which means that if you have a column of 2 BWG UGs ( 4 NW wide each ) if it receives a block M9 order to go in column, each UG will be recentered, be 6 BW wide and so the block is no more as there will be a gap between both UG ! is it correct ?

Also if I have a block of 2 BWG going forward as a line and they do M9 so turn to go in column they will become larger going from 6 BW to 8 BW . How do we center that ? ( the problem being the drawing which centers the movement so should it be centered of based on one flank

I hope I am clear enough otherwise I can still do some pictures but will have to sent them by mail )

[nikgaukroger]

I don't believe that the diagram is meant to be taken that literally or, and perhaps more likely, is not quite correct  in the alignment of the 2 formations, as there is nothing in the rules wording that suggest to me that you make the M9 turn 90 degrees is in any way other than the normal way - i.e. on a front corner (PDF edition makes this explicit for M9 BTW). The diagram does, however, show that there is a difference in the way the bases end up compared to a normal UG making an M9 move.

RJC may want to insert something into the PDF edition about the M9 being normal (assuming I've got it right that is  ).

[lionheartrjc]

The diagram should not be taken that literally.  Battlewagons making an M9 action should turn on the front corner as for other UGs.

This has implications for Battlewagons in line in a block in that they may not all be able to turn (because in turning into column the UG becomes deeper).

Richard

[badhabum]

OK that is already something

But still if we take the front corner, a block of 2 BWG TUG in column ,  will not be a block after the move as the new  as the new "in line" frontage is less wide . It will still create a GAP.( the question has been asked to me )

Now if the 2 BWG UGS are side by side, forming a block and line. When the units receive a M9 order to create a column, they Will turn  90°( right or left, player's choice) . Now the new width will be more than the original width by at least one BW for each UG. How do we solve that move ? We push back the other UG one BW away of forward the first moved UG ? ( still can sent pictures if need be )

[lionheartrjc]

No.  You will need a turn and move.  That is why I said that some moves may not be possible for blocks. 

Richard

[badhabum]

Thank you

[badhabum]

Ok due to some discussions and disagreements I will try a very simple question :

A BWG UG in line , 2 BWG in the UG so 3 BW wide turns 90° .

So it will become 4 BW wide and needs more space

It could shift a friendly TUG by 1/2 BW to make room if need be but no more so the move might be impossible if more than 1/2 BW is necessary

It may displace a SG up to one BW

It this assumption correct ?

[nikgaukroger]

It could shift a friendly TUG by 1/2 BW to make room if need be but no more so the move might be impossible if more than 1/2 BW is necessary

IIRC the only time you can displace a friendly TUG is when aligning in combat. Do you mean the BWg TUG can make a Universal 1/2 BW Shift perhaps?

It may displace a SG up to one BW

With the usual restrictions re: shooting and charge range of course.

[badhabum]

OK thank you

I knew there was something but did not find it :

IIRC the only time you can displace a friendly TUG is when aligning in combat. Do you mean the BWg TUG can make a Universal 1/2 BW Shift perhaps?

Two different questions/aspects

The universal 1/2 BW shift . So if they turn , BWG could shift to avoid a friendly UG if going from line to column but not shift a friendly UG

Sorry but still some long covid not always making it easy

Next : displace a friendly UG stickly speaking when aligning initially and not when expanding using MF1

[Jilu]

The diagram should not be taken that literally.  Battlewagons making an M9 action should turn on the front corner as for other UGs.

This has implications for Battlewagons in line in a block in that they may not all be able to turn (because in turning into column the UG becomes deeper).

Richard

.

Perhaps make a diagram that is showing the reality of the situation?
The questions asked perhaps show gaps in the explanation about WW