Threat zone

[Marcel Bos]

Hi!

If an third rank element of Ax starts its movement at 80p from the enemy it is not allowed to move sideways because of 'reaching' the enemy TZ, but it can move back (DBMM Commentary 'Threat zones').
Is it possible to move a little backwards, then sideways and than forward again, in one move, to fill a gap?

Thanks,

Marcel

[Barritus]

G'day Marcel

No. The rules are quite clear on page 32, 6th dot point, that if you an element moves backwards out of a threat zone, the move is "only straight back". Lateral moves like you describe are only possible if the element starts its move not in a Threat Zone.

[landmeister]

Yo can move for free, because your element begins its move at the limit of the TZ. This means that it's not reached, entered or started in it. Certainly you can move straight backwards, but also into any other direction provided that you respect all TZ restrictions if you decide enter into it.

[MikeCampbell]

As you can see there's some discussion about this!!

the easiest way to play is that per the DBMM "Commentary" available elsewhere on this site:

The rule says "Any move that will reach, enter or start in". If you are at 80p you have reached and start in
the Threat Zone.

If you prefer to think that "reach" is an active verb (ie is you start on the edge then you haven't "reached" it"), which is what Landmeister is saying, then you need to remember that if you move directly sideways you WILL "reach" the TZ of enemy elements adjacent to the one to your front - but any move away from them is fine.

[Marcel Bos]

I thought the rules were not, but the DBMM-commentary (Toby Partridge) were quite clear about this issue.
The element not yet in the TZ, can't move directly sideways because it reaches the TZ doing that, and is so restricted by the TZ-rules. But moving immediatly backwards, you don't reach, enter or starts in the TZ, so you don't have to follow the TZ-rules, so I thought it should be a free single element move, allowed every movement, except of course directly sideways.
The move I suggested should only be a problem when there is also a element directly behind the element that starts at 80p and it can't move back first.  :'(

[toby]

There is an element of confusion creeping in here because Mike is quoting from an as-yet unpublished version of the Commentary that is still under debate.

Marcel is quite correct in his understanding of the current commentary. That is still what I believe Phil has ruled.

However, a large number of people on the DBMM List (including a number of competition umpires) have stated that they will rule to the contrary. It is obviously a very difficult situation where an 'unofficial' Commentary that is only used by virtue of its wide acceptance contains something that is not widely accepted. Therefore the Commentary will unfortunately need to change to maintain consistency - the main aim of it is to insure that people can enjoy a game of DBMM with the same rulings and assumptions so they don't get any surprises from local versions of the rules.

The latest deliberations on the impact of dog-legging around TZs also have an impact on this and may result in the TZ distance rule being interpreted differently as well.

This may all sound a bit strange but it really is a bit like poring over religious texts trying to work out what the underlying meaning is.

Toby

[Marcel Bos]

Thanks all of you!

I shall wait for the new (as-yet unpublished) commentary to see what the future brings to us. 

Marcel

[MikeCampbell]

Ooops...mea culpa!!

[MikkelPetersen]

Hi everyone

Just wondering if this issue has been resolved? I've looked for the commentary, but I can't seem to find it?

All the best,

Mikkel

[toby]

Commentary is on the main dbmm.org.uk website.

The issue has not been resolved - I had a conversation with Phil about it at the SoA battle day and need to sort out the implications.

Toby

[Valentinian Victor]

The easiest solution would be to have a rule change which states once you reach a TZ then the only possible moves are halt, forward or straight back. This for me would be more than acceptable.

[Hammy]

The easiest solution would be to have a rule change which states once you reach a TZ then the only possible moves are halt, forward or straight back. This for me would be more than acceptable.

That would be fine if Phil hadn't specifically stated in an E-mail that an element starting exactly on the edge of a TZ was not in the TZ and therfore not restricted by it.

If he has talked to Toby then perhaps there will be some thing to clear this up in the comentary.