M6 Advance and Contract clarification query

[nikgaukroger]

Posting this as I have seen it played different ways (and have done myself, alas  )

Essentially can you go from the position in this pic (please note the 1BW marker for Close Proximity Zone reference)



to the position in this pic?




I.e. when does the movement of the bases actually happen.

(for RJC I agree with what he ruled at Roll Call but feel it worth posting about for the reason above)

[rayfredjohn]

you caan't do it.  There is a sequence. Move then contract. As the move must be minimum 2BW straight ahead, you will enter ZOC.

[badhabum]

I would agree with Ray BUT it is written that you must advance 2 MU forward and that you contract formation ...

There is no sequencing of the actions. So you might argue that you contract at the beginning of the movement !

[rayfredjohn]

I would agree with Ray BUT it is written that you must advance 2 MU forward and that you contract formation ...

There is no sequencing of the actions. So you might argue that you contract at the beginning of the movement !

That presumably is the nub of the argument


Simon?

[Simon Meg-Meister]

The move is representing front ranks advancing and others falling in behind.
So it is allowed. The order not being speicified to thereby allow it.
Hence use of and contract rather than then contract in the notes.

Perhaps better to name it?
M6: ADVANCE AND FALL IN BEHIND.

HOWEVER ... it should probably also only be allowed distant from the enemy.
And I can see the potential cheese pointed out is real.

SO ... propose to clarify officially now as a move and THEN contract which has a similar effect.
For vs 2 next year propose I will change it and make it only if 4BW from enemy TuGs.

[rayfredjohn]

The move is representing front ranks advancing and others falling in behind.
So it is allowed. The order not being speicified to thereby allow it.
Hence use of and contract rather than then contract in the notes.

Perhaps better to name it?

M6: ADVANCE AND FALL IN BEHIND.

Love it. My new favourite move.............. if I can remember it

[nikgaukroger]

Must confess I am not sure if this explanation is a good thing.

It certainly reinforces my view that RJC's suggestion of what qualifies as a flank attack is a highly desirable change as allowing this sort of move will increase the number of marginal flank attacks possible.

[rayfredjohn]

Must confess I am not sure if this explanation is a good thing.

It certainly reinforces my view that RJC's suggestion of what qualifies as a flank attack is a highly desirable change as allowing this sort of move will increase the number of marginal flank attacks possible.

mhwaaaaaa

[lionheartrjc]

The move is representing front ranks advancing and others falling in behind.
So it is allowed. The order not being speicified to thereby allow it.
Hence use of and contract rather than then contract in the notes.

Perhaps better to name it?

M6: ADVANCE AND FALL IN BEHIND.

Simon,

I think this is dreadful and will damage the game.  The problem is that if you have two units facing each other (no other units involved), but both overlapping each other and the player without the deck can move second, then they can use the M6 move and in the subsequent turn charge the flank without their opponent being able to do anything about it.  Either change it, or do not allow an M6 move within 2 BW of an enemy TuG (as for the double wheel).  Please.   Flank attacks should be when you get round the flank, not just by pulling off some cheesy move.

Richard

[rayfredjohn]

The move is representing front ranks advancing and others falling in behind.
So it is allowed. The order not being speicified to thereby allow it.
Hence use of and contract rather than then contract in the notes.

Perhaps better to name it?

M6: ADVANCE AND FALL IN BEHIND.

Simon,

I think this is dreadful and will damage the game.  The problem is that if you have two units facing each other (no other units involved), but both overlapping each other and the player without the deck can move second, then they can use the M6 move and in the subsequent turn charge the flank without their opponent being able to do anything about it.  Either change it, or do not allow an M6 move within 2 BW of an enemy TuG (as for the double wheel).  Please.   Flank attacks should be when you get round the flank, not just by pulling off some cheesy move.

Richard

Despite my love of cheese!


I agree with Nik and Richard.


However until ...........................

[nikgaukroger]

Either change it, or do not allow an M6 move within 2 BW of an enemy TuG (as for the double wheel).

Richard

As in you cannot do an M6 if the move starts within 2BW or if it goes within 2BW at any time during its move?

If the former the move above is still possible, especially for cavalry (which may not, per se, be unreasonable), but would be more difficult for infantry to pull off (easier for FoF infantry which again may not be unreasonable per se).

[lionheartrjc]

Any time during its move (see response to double wheel post).

Richard

[nikgaukroger]

Any time during its move (see response to double wheel post).

Richard

I'd support this approach.

[badhabum]

I must admit there is a choice to make.

First the M6 move is a rather easy one being on green for drilled and formed TUGs. Now how often will we encounter that exact situation is another question.

Now if I see it as a gamer, the move is cheesy so I would say that Richard has the right approach.

But having read much about history and having experienced leadership in many mock battles, I know that in the heat of the battle, such a move can easely happen unless you are very cautious. So yes, it is a plausible move because most of the real fighters have a tunnel vision and due to dust etc...do not notice all the threatening moves and that's why we read about many flank charges that surprise their targets.

As a player knows it is possible, he should deploy accordingly and pay attention .

A choice to make .

[Hunter]

Any time during its move (see response to double wheel post).

Richard

I'd support this approach.

+1