And what about this lining up?

[landmeister]

Dear all,
' ? ()
I had the situation shon in diagram 1. Blue elements are enemy Ax. Orange elements are friendly Wb(O). Elements E and F are in close combat. Column 3-4 is moving spontaneously, so will have to line up against element B, but none of them can line up legally to the other. Is this one of these rare situation in which elements A-C should be moved to end immediately behind B-D and them the new column so formed shifted leftwards to line up against 3?

Thank you very much in advance.

[LawrenceG]

The free move is limited to 80p, which would be exceeded by the move you describe.

It should be possible to line B up with the front of 3 by shifting D to its left, C to its right and A behind B. There may be other combinations of shifts, pivots and dropping back that would also work.

It could be argued that 3 is prevented from lining up by friends, so its move is cancelled. However, I think the bullet point for "... a column entering a gap..." applies so the enemy must conform instead.

[landmeister]

Interesting. I think your solution is very good. Thank you. 

The only point I disagree with is that about cancelling the move. I think that the first para on page 33 is very clear, geometrical ploys cannot avoid contact. As you say, this column is in a gap, but nit within a one element wide gap, as is intended in that rule.

However, my solution was not as far as "the good one" after all. 

Thank you again

[Valentinian Victor]

The other, more logical, alternative would be to move the group of 4 Ax back enough so that the Wb can legally make contact. Or, you could move one of the combats on the left or right enough so that the Wb column can move into contact.

[landmeister]

The other, more logical, alternative would be to move the group of 4 Ax back enough so that the Wb can legally make contact. Or, you could move one of the combats on the left or right enough so that the Wb column can move into contact.

I'm afraid none of these solutions are legal. Firstly, blocking elements can be moved the minimum distance the minimum distance to end immediatley behind others. In your case, none is moving behind any other, just moved rearwards. Secondly, elements in close combat can NEVER be moved/shifted, etc. They are like impassable terrain, I'm afraid. 

A rare situation, but I think that the one suggested by Larry is the only legal one so far.

[LawrenceG]

Interesting. I think your solution is very good. Thank you. 

The only point I disagree with is that about cancelling the move. I think that the first para on page 33 is very clear, geometrical ploys cannot avoid contact. As you say, this column is in a gap, but nit within a one element wide gap, as is intended in that rule.

However, my solution was not as far as "the good one" after all. 

Thank you again

How do you know that it intended only a one element wide gap?

[landmeister]

Because the second bullet says "...an element or column entering a gap...". But now that I've read it again, no width is specified!  I'm afraid I had paraphrased the rule! 

So I had a column entering a gap. You're right. This should be the applicable rule.

Thank you.

[LawrenceG]

Because the second bullet says "...an element or column entering a gap...". But now that I've read it again, no width is specified!  I'm afraid I had paraphrased the rule! 

So I had a column entering a gap. You're right. This should be the applicable rule.

Thank you.

The commentary authors might like to consider what gaps fall within the scope of this rule. Presumably not a 30 element wide gap between two elements on opposite sides of the table. Phil may well have intended it to be a 1 element wide gap, but I think any gap not wide enough for the moving element or column to line up would be better.

[honk16]

I would have thougt, that "gap" on pg. 33 :"..if an alement or Column entering a gap.." means a gap less than 2 Elts wide, else the restiction on Elts or columns for the Enemy to conform if moving through "gaps" would make not too much sense.

Tilman

[landmeister]

I would have thougt, that "gap" on pg. 33 :"..if an alement or Column entering a gap.." means a gap less than 2 Elts wide, else the restiction on Elts or columns for the Enemy to conform if moving through "gaps" would make not too much sense.

Tilman

I agree. Sounds logical.