Recent Posts

81

Rules Questions / Re: Moving into Close Combat

« Last post by LawrenceG1 on May 06, 2021, 01:44:21 PM »

I like the way you are thinking, although I suspect you will find some cases where you can make contact that probably shouldn't be allowed when the element providing the TZ is at an angle.

I think you might need something like:

a) the attacking element moved only straight ahead this turn
b) When it lines up, the attacking element cannot exit any TZ
c) After lining up, all TZing enemy must be (at least partly) directly in front of the attacking element

82

Rules Questions / Re: Moving into Close Combat

« Last post by Marcel Bos on May 06, 2021, 10:15:32 AM »

Lawrence, it took me a week to think about your comment
I sure would like to know which intentions Phil had when he made those 'moving into flank edge combat' rules.

In my vision, in this case, the defensive influence of an element reach out far beyond the borders of his TZ.
This is in contradiction of Phils own rule that it is an absolute requirement to move in real life combat.

As a houserule I would also allow full edge contact if both:
a) the attacking element moved only straight ahead this turn
b) to line-up in corner to corner contact would hypothetical cross the left or right border of an enemy TZ

I just have to try it out in my next (after Corona) battles 

83

Rules Questions / Re: Moving into Close Combat

« Last post by LawrenceG1 on April 28, 2021, 04:12:40 PM »

This is a known situation that arises sometimes and which the rules do not handle very well. By the rules as written you cannot contact the flank in this case.

What you can do is contact the front, but it can get messy and is not always possible.

Another option is to move B forward so it TZs W and half a base to the right so it will be correctly lined up if it moves straight ahead on its next move. On its next move it can then use item (c) from:

Move straight forward either (a) a full tactical move without contacting enemy, or (b) into contact with
an enemy front edge or front corner only, or (c) moving directly towards the enemy exerting the TZ.

(in the Threat Zone section) to contact the flank (if W hasn't moved by then).

This isn't very satisfactory, so you could consider adopting a "house rule" or "playing convention" that allows the flank contact.

84

Rules Questions / Re: Moving into Close Combat

« Last post by Marcel Bos on April 28, 2021, 01:56:13 PM »

Thanks again Lawrence.

I probably understand the rules now, but unfortunately it doesn't always make sense to me.
Just an example:

LH A/B/C move in CC with Ps V/W/X (picture A)
Only Ps W wins (not doubles) his combat, LH B is Repulsed (picture B)
Next Ps W assists Ps V with a flankcontact on LH A (picture C), but Ps V loses (not doubled) (picture D)

LH B can't go anymore in CC with Ps W again, because of the TZ of Ps X.
This, for example, looks strange to me, by pivotting Ps W it will be 'save' for any flank attack.
By the way, if Ps V had won the combat LH B could go certainly in CC with Ps W.

These where just some thougts.
I will just follow the rules correctly from now on.

85

Rules Questions / Re: Moving into Close Combat

« Last post by LawrenceG1 on April 27, 2021, 07:01:07 PM »

Yes.

86

Rules Questions / Moving into Close Combat

« Last post by Marcel Bos on April 27, 2021, 12:40:56 PM »

See attachment.

Ax A moves into Close Combat with Wb V.
Ax A tries to line-up with Wb V, but is obstructed by enemy Wb W.
Therefore Wb V has to line-up with Ax A,but is obstructed by Ax B (partially in front of Ax A)
So, Wb W has to be moved out of the way, so Ax A can definitively line up with Wb V.
Is this the right way to play?

87

Rules Questions / Re: Moving into Flank edge contact

« Last post by Marcel Bos on April 24, 2021, 08:23:36 PM »

It is a lot clearer now, thanks!

88

Rules Questions / Re: Moving into Flank edge contact

« Last post by LawrenceG1 on April 24, 2021, 08:01:49 PM »

If we ignore the fact that Ax W's TZ prevents the flank contact, the 2nd sentence in the moving into close combat section (In my edition 2.1, I think it is the same in 2.0) starting "A move is cancelled ..." is clearly intended to be an exception to the "absolute requirement" (otherwise there would be no point in its being there).

89

Rules Questions / Re: Moving into Flank edge contact

« Last post by Marcel Bos on April 24, 2021, 04:12:53 PM »

Thank you Lawrence for the explanation! 

I have attached another example E.
This movement won't also be allowed by the rules, am I correct? Because Cv A can't line-up correctly.
Do you understand why the most important rule 'absolute requirement'... 'in real life' etc. should be dismissed in this case?

By the way, it is not so easy to buy the rules 2.1 (at a normal price) in the Netherlands 
I have to wait, and try to buy one at a wargame-fair (when it is organized again).

90

Rules Questions / Re: Moving into Flank edge contact

« Last post by LawrenceG1 on April 24, 2021, 03:38:27 PM »

A is correct. Because this is an allowed contact, the blocking element does not have to be moved out of the way.

C I think is ambiguous. You could argue that "any element in close combat" is preventing lining up which would mean the move is not allowed. Or you could argue that lining up is blocked by enemy, which means you don't need to line up (so the fact it is also blocked by a friendly element becomes irrelevant). Using the "must move into contact " principle suggests the "is allowed" argument should prevail.

D Now only a friendly element is blocking lining up, and the blocking element is in close combat, so the move is not allowed. Note, even if the friendly Cv was not there, you would still not be allowed to do the move as the TZ of the enemy would prevent lining up; you would have to line up with the front of the 2nd enemy element instead.

FYI the most recent edition of the rules is 2.1 (2016) Available from   https://www.lulu.com/shop/phil-barker/shop/phil-barker/de-bellis-magistrorum-militum-version-21/paperback/product-1vgrmpyz.html?page=1&pageSize=4

By the way, the forum at  https://groups.io/g/DBMMlist gets more traffic than this one, but this one has a better signal-to-noise ratio.