Side to side Fighting

[Roger]

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


[attachment deleted by admin]

[lionheartrjc]

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

[nikgaukroger]

A contrary argument would be that the rule says that the UG can turn 90 degrees and not that bases/files can turn.

[lionheartrjc]

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

[nikgaukroger]

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.

[lionheartrjc]

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]

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

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

[marshalney2000]

I just hope we are not going to introduce lots of cheesy moves that will spoil an excellent set of rules.

[AntiokosIII]

I just hope we are not going to introduce lots of cheesy moves that will spoil an excellent set of rules.

Amen

[nikgaukroger]

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

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.

[badhabum]

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]

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 ...

[badhabum]

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]

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.

[Roger]

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?