6 quick questions

[landmeister]

Dear all.

I'm learning al lot every game I play, but new queries arise too!  . I would appreciate some help about these questions.

1. Scouting stratagem. What happens if I allocate 3 LH elements and I get 4, 5, and 6? Can I see all enemy ambushers or just the furthest forward?

2. Ambush stratagem. Can I ambush my general element inside a fortified BUA if I hide half its command in such BUA? And can I ambush my general and its Baggage in a wood?

3. Roads. Must a second or third road always cross/join the previous one? Where must those 2000p be calculated from?

4. Can an invader put a Lake and a wood? I read all other terrains are discarded if I put a WW, L, S. Right?

5. Visibility. Troops on a hill can see or be seen from troops not on that hill and within 90? of straight downhill. Sorry, don?t understand the bit of within 90? of straight downhill. . Why an element on flat can?t see an enemy within 90? uphill?

6. Marches. I mustn?t pay extra PIP for finishing my last mach short if my element can be shot at. This means I must stop at 241 p from enemy Bw, but on page 26 is said that ??specifying ?1p? or ?1mm? as the distance is unnecessary as well as implausible?. Ok, I will stop at 240 p and will tell my opponent that I?m NOT at 241 p. The question is will I or will I not be able to charge next bound (they are Cv)?

Thank you very much in advance.

[toby]

Haven't got my rules on me at the moment, so I can't answer all of these, but I will chip what I think I know...

Dear all.

I'm learning al lot every game I play, but new queries arise too!  . I would appreciate some help about these questions.

1. Scouting stratagem. What happens if I allocate 3 LH elements and I get 4, 5, and 6? Can I see all enemy ambushers or just the furthest forward?

2. Ambush stratagem. Can I ambush my general element inside a fortified BUA if I hide half its command in such BUA? And can I ambush my general and its Baggage in a wood?

3. Roads. Must a second or third road always cross/join the previous one? Where must those 2000p be calculated from?

4. Can an invader put a Lake and a wood? I read all other terrains are discarded if I put a WW, L, S. Right?

5. Visibility. Troops on a hill can see or be seen from troops not on that hill and within 90? of straight downhill. Sorry, don?t understand the bit of within 90? of straight downhill. . Why an element on flat can?t see an enemy within 90? uphill?

An element on the flat can see an element on a hill so long as the element on the flat is within a 90 degree arc centered on the line that goes from the element on the hill straight down the hill. The element on the hill can also see the element on the flat. If the element on the flat is outside that arc, it is assumed that some undulation in the hill that isn't explicitly modelled will hide the element from view. Similarly elements on the hill are hidden from each other over a certain distance by these random undulations. Contrary to most wargaming terrain, real hills tend not to be very smooth.

6. Marches. I mustn?t pay extra PIP for finishing my last mach short if my element can be shot at. This means I must stop at 241 p from enemy Bw, but on page 26 is said that ??specifying ?1p? or ?1mm? as the distance is unnecessary as well as implausible?. Ok, I will stop at 240 p and will tell my opponent that I?m NOT at 241 p. The question is will I or will I not be able to charge next bound (they are Cv)?

Thank you very much in advance.

You don't need to pay the extra PIP for finishing short if your enemy can be shot at. I don't think this means that you can stop short the moment you are in shooting range. I think it is referring to the march restriction that states that if you march into the shooting arc and range of an element that could shoot at you, you must stop at the closest point at which it could shoot at you. You don't need to pay the extra PIP for stopping short in this case. This is to prevent people marching through shooting zones without being shot at, since marching is assumed to take place in both players bounds.

[landmeister]

An element on the flat can see an element on a hill so long as the element on the flat is within a 90 degree arc centered on the line that goes from the element on the hill straight down the hill. The element on the hill can also see the element on the flat. If the element on the flat is outside that arc, it is assumed that some undulation in the hill that isn't explicitly modelled will hide the element from view. Similarly elements on the hill are hidden from each other over a certain distance by these random undulations. Contrary to most wargaming terrain, real hills tend not to be very smooth.

Ok Let's rewrite it. I must draw an imaginary line connecting any point from the element on the hill and the limit of that hill, and this line MUST be perpendicular to such limit. Right? Then I must draw two imaginary arcs from this line: one 45? leftwards and another 45? rightwards (totalling a 90? arc). Right? Everyone outside this arc can't see nor be seen by the other.

You don't need to pay the extra PIP for finishing short if your enemy can be shot at. I don't think this means that you can stop short the moment you are in shooting range. I think it is referring to the march restriction that states that if you march into the shooting arc and range of an element that could shoot at you, you must stop at the closest point at which it could shoot at you. You don't need to pay the extra PIP for stopping short in this case. This is to prevent people marching through shooting zones without being shot at, since marching is assumed to take place in both players bounds.

But the closest point at wich I can be shot at is the shooting range itself if I'm coming from outside the shooting arc!! Are you sure?

[Hammy]

You don't need to pay the extra PIP for finishing short if your enemy can be shot at. I don't think this means that you can stop short the moment you are in shooting range. I think it is referring to the march restriction that states that if you march into the shooting arc and range of an element that could shoot at you, you must stop at the closest point at which it could shoot at you. You don't need to pay the extra PIP for stopping short in this case. This is to prevent people marching through shooting zones without being shot at, since marching is assumed to take place in both players bounds.

But the closest point at wich I can be shot at is the shooting range itself if I'm coming from outside the shooting arc!! Are you sure?

Phil's stunning language strikes again.

A march move that comes within shooting range must stop at the CLOSEST point to the enemy that it reaches. If for example I am a LH(F) and I want to nip across infront of your archers I could march past a possition where I could be shot and out beyond your arc of fire. The bit about closest approach is to stop people sneaking past archers not to stop them marching up to them.

If my march move is towards the shooters the closest point I get to will be at the end of my full march distance.

Hammy

[landmeister]

Phil's stunning language strikes again.

A march move that comes within shooting range must stop at the CLOSEST point to the enemy that it reaches. If for example I am a LH(F) and I want to nip across infront of your archers I could march past a possition where I could be shot and out beyond your arc of fire. The bit about closest approach is to stop people sneaking past archers not to stop them marching up to them.

If my march move is towards the shooters the closest point I get to will be at the end of my full march distance.

Hammy

I see. And do you measure the exact path every time you move across an enemy arc?  What happens if your LH(F) are wheeling while crossing it? 

Additionally I would like to know wht happens when you declare your Cv is 241 p away from my Bw but you put them effectively at 240. I can't shoot them, but can you charge me? I guess not, but I'm not sure now!  :'(

Thank you

[toby]

Phil's stunning language strikes again.

A march move that comes within shooting range must stop at the CLOSEST point to the enemy that it reaches. If for example I am a LH(F) and I want to nip across infront of your archers I could march past a possition where I could be shot and out beyond your arc of fire. The bit about closest approach is to stop people sneaking past archers not to stop them marching up to them.

If my march move is towards the shooters the closest point I get to will be at the end of my full march distance.

Hammy

I see. And do you measure the exact path every time you move across an enemy arc?  What happens if your LH(F) are wheeling while crossing it? 

Additionally I would like to know wht happens when you declare your Cv is 241 p away from my Bw but you put them effectively at 240. I can't shoot them, but can you charge me? I guess not, but I'm not sure now!  :'(

Thank you

You normally have a fair idea of where they are going and the don't really need to be at the exact closest point of their march. As Hammy pointed out, its to stop people marching straight past and out of arc again.

The Cv are either at 241p or at 240p - they can't be at different points at different times. If you allow people to 'declare' distances (a habit I personally abhor although I will often ask my opponent to validate a distance if it on the cusp), then you have to remember what the declared distance is. Personally I prefer the distance to be whatever is actually the distance between them on the tabletop because then you don't have to remember things or write them down. One of the things that I like about DBM is the WYSIWYG aspect of the tabletop, which is why Art(S) not being able to shoot for 3 turns after moving is so irritating - its something that isn't reflected on the tabletop.

[landmeister]

I see. And any help about the other questions?

Thanks

[Hammy]

The Cv are either at 241p or at 240p - they can't be at different points at different times. If you allow people to 'declare' distances (a habit I personally abhor although I will often ask my opponent to validate a distance if it on the cusp), then you have to remember what the declared distance is. Personally I prefer the distance to be whatever is actually the distance between them on the tabletop because then you don't have to remember things or write them down. One of the things that I like about DBM is the WYSIWYG aspect of the tabletop, which is why Art(S) not being able to shoot for 3 turns after moving is so irritating - its something that isn't reflected on the tabletop.

One of the things I like most about DBx is that in torurnament games when you want to move an element or group to a specific place it is generally accepted that you declare where they are rather than have to place them precisely at the point they are supposed to be. If you have a long line of troops (in DBM) that march as close as they can to enemy you KNOW they are at 200 paces If they have a 100 pace move you KNOW they are at 100 paces so can contact next move. There is no argument along the lines of "well this end of your 8 element wide group is in reach but the other end is 2mm too far away so it can't make it"

Phil apparently doesn't like this (much like Toby), I really cannot understand why as it makes playing the game a much more pleasant experience.

A lot of the DBMM changes are attempts to force people to play the game the way Phil thinks it should be played which is why sometimes they might not seem to make sense.

Hammy

[toby]

I would hate to be lumped into the same category as Phil on anything other than ability to win DBM battles where I am running pretty close.

I have no problem with the declared position approach provided both sides can remember where they are, which is where I have the problem because I have the short term memory of a goldfish. It when they mysteriously move from outside bow-range to inside charge range that I get annoyed.

That said, I feel that a system that discourages micro-measurement is more realistic, since ancient troops didn't really have a concept of being safe because they were outside exact bow range.

I would love to see a system where all distances had a little random factor added on to make things a bit less predictable

[Hammy]

I would hate to be lumped into the same category as Phil on anything other than ability to win DBM battles where I am running pretty close.

I have no problem with the declared position approach provided both sides can remember where they are, which is where I have the problem because I have the short term memory of a goldfish. It when they mysteriously move from outside bow-range to inside charge range that I get annoyed.

That said, I feel that a system that discourages micro-measurement is more realistic, since ancient troops didn't really have a concept of being safe because they were outside exact bow range.

The issue is that if I move my troops to somewhere where I know they are out of bowshot for example but then somoen knocks the table or pulls the cloth and I suddenly end up in range who is right?

I agree that ancient soldiers don't have theodolites but moving to just outside bowshot or getting near enough to be able to charge next move both seem pretty reasonable to me.

Phil has a huge downer on this and seems to think it is hyper competitive or something. Personally I find it smooths the waters and makes everything nice and easy.

There are times when you KNOW exactly where things should be and there is no way they could possibly be anywhere else but if you play that bases are where they are then you can get into endless arguments. Things like troops that recoil and pursue, you know what is where but an actual base might not be exactly in contact as an overlap where there is no way it couldn't be etc.

Hammy

[Doug M.]

I am with Hammy on this one, I used to play a lot of Competition DBM, and games were always much more pleasant where players 'declared the intent' of the move. It meant that measuring was kept to a minimum, there were no arguments about whether units were within the proverbial 'bees-d!ck' of each other etc... 

I can see Phil's point that ancient troops didn't carry theodolites but by experience they would have known whether they were close enough to charge without running out of breath, or whether they were out of effective range of bowmen etc.

A lot of these issues arise simply because we have a turn based sequence, rather than the continuous movement of reality - in reality the troops advance and cop the number of volleys they are going to cop..   in DBx we try and minimise the number by careful manouvering.

regards