Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Side to side Fighting  (Read 242 times)

Roger

  • Psiloi
  • *
  • Posts: 10
    • View Profile
Side to side Fighting
« on: February 07, 2019, 12:50:06 PM »
In a recent battle, the following scenario happened,  Unit A and B charged, Unit A continued past the flank to attack a unit that was set back 1 base width.
First question, in movement can the second ranks in Unit 1 and 3 turn to fight Unit A during Melee, armed only with short spear they are not supporting the front rank in fighting,
Diagram attached
« Last Edit: February 07, 2019, 12:59:54 PM by Roger »

lionheartrjc

  • TWZ Team
  • Auxilia
  • *
  • Posts: 84
    • View Profile
Re: Side to side Fighting
« Reply #1 on: February 07, 2019, 01:06:16 PM »
9.4G1.2 (page80) would appear to apply.  "Where an UG is in side contact with the side edge of an enemy IF it may turn 90o in movement and thereby create a Melee Combat to the side.

So yes, you can.  Note however that if you do this and the element facing to the front is killed, you may expose yourself to a flank charge!  (but see below)

Richard
« Last Edit: February 07, 2019, 04:14:53 PM by lionheartrjc »

nikgaukroger

  • Legionary
  • *
  • Posts: 204
    • View Profile
Re: Side to side Fighting
« Reply #2 on: February 07, 2019, 01:18:43 PM »
A contrary argument would be that the rule says that the UG can turn 90 degrees and not that bases/files can turn.
"The Roman Empire was not murdered and nor did it die a natural death; it accidentally committed suicide."

lionheartrjc

  • TWZ Team
  • Auxilia
  • *
  • Posts: 84
    • View Profile
Re: Side to side Fighting
« Reply #3 on: February 07, 2019, 04:07:25 PM »
A contrary argument would be that the rule says that the UG can turn 90 degrees and not that bases/files can turn.

I do note the point that page 80 appears to refer to turning the whole UG, not individual bases.

However:
The QRS MF1 says that you can move unengaged bases to a single new file, (note you cannot do it as an MF2 move because the enemy is not in frontal contact).
9.2B1 (page 56) says that while in combat an UG can end up in any formation that the combat requires.

Richard
« Last Edit: February 07, 2019, 04:12:50 PM by lionheartrjc »

nikgaukroger

  • Legionary
  • *
  • Posts: 204
    • View Profile
Re: Side to side Fighting
« Reply #4 on: February 07, 2019, 05:06:57 PM »
Interesting, hadn't though of MF1 being used like that. Claries diagram on Files & Supporting Files certainly shows that bases at 90 degress are a different file.

So, in which case, in the following situation from last night (IIRC, but an example regardless):



Base A could have been turned onto the flank of base X with an MF1 move?

What about base B?

And in Roger's example would you have to move the 3rd rank base in some way before moving the 2nd rank base in order to give the 2nd rank base room to fit - otherwise it'll be trying to put a 40mm frontage into a 20mm space.
« Last Edit: February 07, 2019, 05:10:15 PM by nikgaukroger »
"The Roman Empire was not murdered and nor did it die a natural death; it accidentally committed suicide."

lionheartrjc

  • TWZ Team
  • Auxilia
  • *
  • Posts: 84
    • View Profile
Re: Side to side Fighting
« Reply #5 on: February 07, 2019, 08:42:13 PM »
Your diagram has set me thinking.

Base A is an engaged base (it is an overlap) so cannot form a new file.
Base B is not engaged but I am pretty sure it is not allowed to form a new file on the flank - I just can't find a clarrie or rule that prevents it.  (I guess the same would apply to the example Robin gave).

This needs clarification!

Richard

Roger

  • Psiloi
  • *
  • Posts: 10
    • View Profile
Re: Side to side Fighting
« Reply #6 on: February 07, 2019, 09:43:23 PM »
Page 80 G1.2 says UG may turn 90 degrees to face and the diagram shows Gallic warriors fighting to the front but having the ability to turn a file, and with 9.2B1 (page 56) saying that while in combat an UG can end up in any formation that the combat requires, there doesn't seem to be a reason why they shouldn't turn to fight ;D

OK Question 2 if unit 1 and 3 where already formed in ORB so were already facing (so able to fight) in all directions could they engage in the charge combat Phase? rather than melee

Question 3 would that be a flank attack :D
« Last Edit: February 07, 2019, 09:52:39 PM by Roger »

marshalney2000

  • Psiloi
  • *
  • Posts: 14
    • View Profile
Re: Side to side Fighting
« Reply #7 on: February 07, 2019, 10:30:30 PM »
I just hope we are not going to introduce lots of cheesy moves that will spoil an excellent set of rules.

AntiokosIII

  • Psiloi
  • *
  • Posts: 23
    • View Profile
Re: Side to side Fighting
« Reply #8 on: February 08, 2019, 05:30:32 AM »
I just hope we are not going to introduce lots of cheesy moves that will spoil an excellent set of rules.

Amen
Miniature Wargaming is the only completely honorable form of warfare ever invented by man.

nikgaukroger

  • Legionary
  • *
  • Posts: 204
    • View Profile
Re: Side to side Fighting
« Reply #9 on: February 08, 2019, 07:08:05 AM »
Page 80 G1.2 says UG may turn 90 degrees to face and the diagram shows Gallic warriors fighting to the front but having the ability to turn a file, and with 9.2B1 (page 56) saying that while in combat an UG can end up in any formation that the combat requires, there doesn't seem to be a reason why they shouldn't turn to fight ;D

As we have noted above the rule on page 80 refers to whe whole UG turning and not single bases/files - so it does not apply in your example. The diagram on the same page refers to an MF2 move which allows turning bases which have enemy in frontal contact with their flank/rear - again your example is not such a case and so this move does not apply.
"The Roman Empire was not murdered and nor did it die a natural death; it accidentally committed suicide."

badhabum

  • Legionary
  • *
  • Posts: 105
    • View Profile
Re: Side to side Fighting
« Reply #10 on: February 08, 2019, 10:02:06 AM »
I had that discussion with Simon. The intend is that only a TUG that acts as supportcould turn 90 not a single base of a TUG. it was done in order to avoid cheesy situations, moves and so on ...just my 2 cents

nikgaukroger

  • Legionary
  • *
  • Posts: 204
    • View Profile
Re: Side to side Fighting
« Reply #11 on: February 08, 2019, 10:06:32 AM »
I had that discussion with Simon. The intend is that only a TUG that acts as supportcould turn 90 not a single base of a TUG. it was done in order to avoid cheesy situations, moves and so on ...just my 2 cents

Not just intent it is in the claries - as RJC pointed out above a supporting base counts as engaged and so cannot use the MF1 move. What about unengaged bases ...
"The Roman Empire was not murdered and nor did it die a natural death; it accidentally committed suicide."

badhabum

  • Legionary
  • *
  • Posts: 105
    • View Profile
Re: Side to side Fighting
« Reply #12 on: February 08, 2019, 10:08:12 AM »
I haven't my rules with me but does the rule not say that the TUG that turns 90 to make acontact in the flank have to be in support ???

nikgaukroger

  • Legionary
  • *
  • Posts: 204
    • View Profile
Re: Side to side Fighting
« Reply #13 on: February 08, 2019, 10:12:50 AM »
The situation re: an UG turning 90 degrees to create a combat has been covered above and isn't relevent to the situation being discussed.
"The Roman Empire was not murdered and nor did it die a natural death; it accidentally committed suicide."

Roger

  • Psiloi
  • *
  • Posts: 10
    • View Profile
Re: Side to side Fighting
« Reply #14 on: February 08, 2019, 10:18:14 AM »
I understood the restriction on moves if the base was engaged to its front in a support role, but unengaged bases? This impacts on My question 2 if Unit 1 and 3 where in orb could they fight:
1. in charge and melee Phase?
2. in melee Phase?
3. Not at all?