Expandables in close combat

[Marcel Bos]

Hi,

What happens if Expandables are only contacted in the flank. They don't turn to face (train, Boats or Expendables) and they don't count their flank edge as front edge (like train or Boats). (p. 35)

I think the Expendables can't fight and are destroyed by their opponents, who can't suffer an combat outcome.

Marcel

[landmeister]

Strange, but I think you are right. I can't find any other reference about this situation in the rules 

[toby]

No. You only disregard outcomes inflicted by a flank edge if the element is also fighting with its front edge. So the Exp will inflict outcomes on you.

[Marcel Bos]

No. You only disregard outcomes inflicted by a flank edge if the element is also fighting with its front edge. So the Exp will inflict outcomes on you.

So, the Expendables will inflict combat outcomes with their flank side. This in contrary to an element which is in combat alone with the rear side of his enemy (p. 56, fig.13).
What about the tactical factors. Of course a -1 for each flank contacted, and maybe a -1 for unable to recoil from their opponent!?   

[toby]

Expendables are the only elements which inflict outcomes to their flanks - all others turn to face or count that side as their front edge.

Unlike other elements, Expendables are automatically destroyed if hit in the rear.

You will get -1 for the flank contact I think, but not -1 for preventing them recoiling - you have to be in contact with their rear for that.

Toby

[adrian_escott]

It seems to me as though as though all elements except train and Boats can end up fighting to their flank.  In the Turning to Face section on p.35, it says when talking about turning the element and possibly moving back the flank contacters that if it is not possible then both moves are cancelled. Assuming that the moves referred to are the turn to face and the moving back, then the contacted element is fighting to its flank.

A further question on the same issue, is what happens if an Expendable (or other element if above is correct) is contacted on both flanks. Presumably it fights the one that contacted it first (at -2 for both flanks contacted). What happens to the other elemnt in flank contact if the Expenedable wins against the first one. This is not covered by the exceptions on dis-regarding combat outcomes so it should suffer the combat outcome, which does not seem correct.

Thanks

Adrian

[MikeCampbell]

It's a total oversight in the rules - anyone who tried to tell you both have to suffer a combat outcome is being anal IMO, and you should never play them again!

I suggest that 1 element suffers an outcome, the otehr is treated as if it is fighting against the flank or rear of an element that is also fighting to the front.

[adrian_escott]

Hi Mike,

Thanks for your feedback - fortunately I don't have an opponent that claims that would be the way to play. I am just starting to read the rules to try to play with some friends and came up with this issue.

I agree that your proposed resolution seems the cleanest and inline with the other combat resolutions. I was concerned I had missed some subtlety somewhere.

Thanks

Adrian 

[landmeister]

Expendables are the only elements which inflict outcomes to their flanks - all others turn to face or count that side as their front edge.

I'm afraid not. Routed elements never turn to face when contacted. They are treated like Expendables, but are NOT immediately destroyed if contacted on the rear. A very, very weird situation, but this is what the rules say! 

[toby]

It seems to me as though as though all elements except train and Boats can end up fighting to their flank.  In the Turning to Face section on p.35, it says when talking about turning the element and possibly moving back the flank contacters that if it is not possible then both moves are cancelled. Assuming that the moves referred to are the turn to face and the moving back, then the contacted element is fighting to its flank.

No - I think the cancelled moves are the move into contact and the attempt to turn.

[landmeister]

No - I think the cancelled moves are the move into contact and the attempt to turn.

Correct.

[adrian_escott]

Hi

Sorry to keep on about this, but it seems to me that cancelling both the original move and the turn to face is problematic from both a rules and gameplay perspective.

From the rules perspective the original move happens in step (2) whereas the turn to face happens in step (4) of a player's bound (see the below quotes from page 26 of the rules)

"(2) It first makes all tactical moves, .... then rout moves. A legal move cannot be taken back once made unless its original position has been marked, and not even then if another element has been moved since. ....."

"(4) Any elements of boith sides in contcat with enemy turn to face, then fight ....... in an order decided by the side whose bound it is."

This means that all moves have to take place before any turns to face are done. Hence when the original move to contact is made it is not possible to know whether the turn to face will be possible or not in step (4). This order of complete all moves and then do the turns to face needs to be done as it is not possible to know which way an element will turn until as it may be contacted on the front/rear later during the movement, e.g. by a spontaneous move into the front after a tactical move into the flank.

Also step (2) expressly forbids taking back a legal move (e.g. the one into contact).

With this interpretation, it seems to me that the rules are saying that a move that was legal in step (2) becomes illegal in step (4)!

From a gameplay perspective, it seems a burden to have to undo moves that took place in step (2) during step (4), in particular remembering where an element was before it moved or perhaps a 2nd element has moved to the place that the flank contacting element started the bound, i.e. it is impossible to take the move back without cancelling another move.

Are people sure the moves that are cancelled (in paragraph 3 on page 35) are the original move and the turn to face and not the turn to face and possible move back of the contacting element?

Thanks

Adrian

[MikeCampbell]

I certainly am.

There are only 2 moves - the move to contact (which is a tactical move), and the "moving back".

Turning to the flank is not a move in this context.

that it means a legal move subsequently becomes illegal is itrrelevant, and that you then don't get to use the PIPs is tough.