41
Rules Questions / Re: Weather changes
« Last post by Marcel Bos on January 14, 2022, 09:23:45 PM »So, even Phil Barker can't predict the weather 
Thanx Barritus!
Thanx Barritus!
Recent Posts
42
Rules Questions / Re: Naval and disembarking
« Last post by Fon Tok Nak on January 11, 2022, 11:24:37 AM »If a land element is on a naval element and the naval element moves, the land element is part of that move (it does not get left behind).
Without its land element embarked, a naval element cannot move, so although the rules do not say, the men from the land element are clearly needed/responsible for moving the naval element.
Consequently, the only way to move a naval element and then its land element in the same bound is by marching, i.e. the point of disembarkation must be further than 400 paces from all known enemy.
Anthony
Without its land element embarked, a naval element cannot move, so although the rules do not say, the men from the land element are clearly needed/responsible for moving the naval element.
Consequently, the only way to move a naval element and then its land element in the same bound is by marching, i.e. the point of disembarkation must be further than 400 paces from all known enemy.
Anthony
43
Rules Questions / Naval and disembarking
« Last post by Neil Williamson on January 11, 2022, 04:34:50 AM »Can a naval element make a tactical move, either group or individual, and then, in the same bound, the element it is carrying, disrmbark making its own tactical move?
My reading is yes but I would like to check especially as I will be using a navy for the first time soon.
Pg 28 states an element can be part of 1 tactical move.
However, I think in page 10 they are treated as separate elements. Each naval element can carry one land element.
So my reading is the naval elements can make their tactical move and then the land elements can make their tactical moves, within the same bound PIPs permitting.
My reading is yes but I would like to check especially as I will be using a navy for the first time soon.
Pg 28 states an element can be part of 1 tactical move.
However, I think in page 10 they are treated as separate elements. Each naval element can carry one land element.
So my reading is the naval elements can make their tactical move and then the land elements can make their tactical moves, within the same bound PIPs permitting.
44
Competitions / Cancon 2022 - Saturday 22 January - Sunday 23 January
« Last post by Barritus on January 06, 2022, 01:26:37 PM »This Cancon’s DBMM v2.1 15mm competition is for armies of 400AP (including stratagems).
There will be four rounds of 3 hours 30 minutes (+/- 10 minutes) on Saturday and Sunday.
Armies permitted are all those within the years 3000BC to 1525AD, one list only.
Please send your list to the tournament organiser by Saturday 15 January for checking.
Late lists will be made available for viewing.
If you have any questions please ask me (peter DOT barritus AT yahoo DOT com DOT au)!
Online entries at https://cgs.asn.au/cancon/cancon-tournaments/
There will be four rounds of 3 hours 30 minutes (+/- 10 minutes) on Saturday and Sunday.
Armies permitted are all those within the years 3000BC to 1525AD, one list only.
Please send your list to the tournament organiser by Saturday 15 January for checking.
Late lists will be made available for viewing.
If you have any questions please ask me (peter DOT barritus AT yahoo DOT com DOT au)!
Online entries at https://cgs.asn.au/cancon/cancon-tournaments/
45
Rules Questions / Re: Weather changes
« Last post by Barritus on January 03, 2022, 01:39:30 AM »I never quite understand weather changes.
LOL.
Don't worry, those of us who've been playing for years still have problems.
Quote
Every army starts the game with 4 PIP-dice including dummy dice.
Correct.
Quote
During the game the dummy dice will be removed.
Correct.
Quote
The odds that a weather change will take place with 4 dice are much smaller that that it will take place with 3 or even 2 dice.
So during the game the odds that a weather change will take place grow.
Correct.
Quote
Is that the intention of the rules?
Good question.
It might be better to consider it a consequence of the rules rather than an intention of the rules.
I'd call it an unintended consequence, but others might not want to see things in such a negative way.
I'm quite sure this issue was pointed out in the earliest discussions of the rules back in the late-noughties, but I don't remember what Barker's view was at the time, or what conclusions were reached.
But yes, as the PIP dice disappear in the course of a game, the likelihood of weather changes increases.
46
Rules Questions / Weather changes
« Last post by Marcel Bos on January 01, 2022, 03:41:33 PM »I never quite understand weather changes.
Every army starts the game with 4 PIP-dice including dummy dice.
During the game the dummy dice will be removed.
The odds that a weather change will take place with 4 dice are much smaller that that it will take place with 3 or even 2 dice.
So during the game the odds that a weather change will take place grow.
Is that the intention of the rules?
Every army starts the game with 4 PIP-dice including dummy dice.
During the game the dummy dice will be removed.
The odds that a weather change will take place with 4 dice are much smaller that that it will take place with 3 or even 2 dice.
So during the game the odds that a weather change will take place grow.
Is that the intention of the rules?
47
Rules Questions / Re: Combat in Rivers
« Last post by Fon Tok Nak on December 20, 2021, 02:44:10 PM »The meaning of 'overlapped' is explained in detail on p.35. The -1 bullet on p.37 is for when the conditions on p.35 are met. To apply that -1 without consideration of p.35 would mean allowing overlapping Art (for example) to inflict that -1.
Other way around. The rule (on p.35) clarifies what happens to your enemy when you are on his flank or rear - he suffers a -1 only if you are also on his front as in "an enemy element which is fighting to its front". An enemy element which is not fighting to its front does not suffer the -1 for you being on a flank.
I agree that this situation rarely comes up, but it is worth noting for combat with Expendables (in particular) and War Wagons (S) and (X).
Anthony
The rule you cite is there to clarify what happens if you are in combat on your front edge and another edge (i.e. you fight only what is in front, with a negative modifier).
Other way around. The rule (on p.35) clarifies what happens to your enemy when you are on his flank or rear - he suffers a -1 only if you are also on his front as in "an enemy element which is fighting to its front". An enemy element which is not fighting to its front does not suffer the -1 for you being on a flank.
I agree that this situation rarely comes up, but it is worth noting for combat with Expendables (in particular) and War Wagons (S) and (X).
Anthony
48
Rules Questions / Re: Combat in Rivers
« Last post by LawrenceG1 on December 19, 2021, 06:35:49 PM »
On the point about -1 for flank edge contact, Neil is correct and Lawrence is not. The -1 to enemy gives friends to the front a greater chance of winning the combat (2 elements attacking 1). If you are only on the flank of an enemy and that enemy does not turn, you do not still inflict the -1 (being now 1 to 1). In other words, you do not have a greater chance of winning the combat by being just on the flank, but if you do win, that win can become a quick kill, so there is still an advantage to a flank-only attack.
Anthony
The tactical factor in the rules is
- 1 For each flank overlapped and/or enemy element in front edge combat with a flank or rear edge.
Nothing there about having to be in combat on the front edge as well.
In most cases, elements that do not turn to face a flank contact also count the edge in combat as a front edge, so would not suffer the -1. But this is a specific exception for specific elements.
49
Rules Questions / Re: Combat in Rivers
« Last post by Fon Tok Nak on December 15, 2021, 07:31:42 AM »I understand where Barritus is coming from on the point that the rules providing for specific cases can't be applied in other cases, although I'd prefer to say "don't try and apply rules out of context."
In this specific case, I would make the following observations:
The river is not impassable, so the Lh can enter it.
They are not trying to cross the river (a movement rule), but are being forced into it as a consequence of lining up (a close combat rule).
They are not fighting Boats. (The 'no recoil against boats' gives boats a specific advantage against waders in the middle of a river. There is nothing to stop troops on the edge of a river recoiling into it or pursuing out of it. Again, the 45-135 degree thing does not apply because they are not trying to cross - they are subject to a combat outcome.)
Consequently, I would have the Lh line up and suffer a minus for being in rough or difficult going.
On the point about -1 for flank edge contact, Neil is correct and Lawrence is not. The -1 to enemy gives friends to the front a greater chance of winning the combat (2 elements attacking 1). If you are only on the flank of an enemy and that enemy does not turn, you do not still inflict the -1 (being now 1 to 1). In other words, you do not have a greater chance of winning the combat by being just on the flank, but if you do win, that win can become a quick kill, so there is still an advantage to a flank-only attack.
Anthony
In this specific case, I would make the following observations:
The river is not impassable, so the Lh can enter it.
They are not trying to cross the river (a movement rule), but are being forced into it as a consequence of lining up (a close combat rule).
They are not fighting Boats. (The 'no recoil against boats' gives boats a specific advantage against waders in the middle of a river. There is nothing to stop troops on the edge of a river recoiling into it or pursuing out of it. Again, the 45-135 degree thing does not apply because they are not trying to cross - they are subject to a combat outcome.)
Consequently, I would have the Lh line up and suffer a minus for being in rough or difficult going.
On the point about -1 for flank edge contact, Neil is correct and Lawrence is not. The -1 to enemy gives friends to the front a greater chance of winning the combat (2 elements attacking 1). If you are only on the flank of an enemy and that enemy does not turn, you do not still inflict the -1 (being now 1 to 1). In other words, you do not have a greater chance of winning the combat by being just on the flank, but if you do win, that win can become a quick kill, so there is still an advantage to a flank-only attack.
Anthony
50
Competitions / Swabian Open 2022
« Last post by Arnim on November 14, 2021, 06:26:56 AM »Hello all,
after skipping the tournament in 2021, we try again in 2022. Due to current rules the event is limited to attendants who are either recovered from Covid within the last 6 month or fully vaccinated.
Details are given here http://www.fsfev.de/swabianopen
Keep gaming in all countries!!!
after skipping the tournament in 2021, we try again in 2022. Due to current rules the event is limited to attendants who are either recovered from Covid within the last 6 month or fully vaccinated.
Details are given here http://www.fsfev.de/swabianopen
Keep gaming in all countries!!!