When do you line up in TZ?

[toby]

Up to now I have always played it that you can make a conforming slide at any point in the move once you have become a TZ'ed element.

It may be that on closer reading of the text that it can be interpreted to not allow this, but I think the intention of Phil is clear - geometric ploys should not prevent contact - it says this at the top of page 33. If it remains unclear, it may have to get an entry in the Commentary, unless Phil rewrites it in the meantime.

I have to say that I feel you are possibly trying to over-interpret this.

Toby

[Platypus]

Hi Guys,

A group can move sideways in a TZ to line up. P33 is very clear about that. That was the explicit intention of the rule during development. The text on p28 is a fossil and Phil will deal with it after the army lists.

Glad that's cleared up then!

G^is,
JohnG

[landmeister]

A group can move sideways in a TZ to line up. P33 is very clear about that. That was the explicit intention of the rule during development. The text on p28 is a fossil and Phil will deal with it after the army lists.

That's music to my ears!  . Thanks for the clarification, John.

[LawrenceG]

The 80 p free extra move must be "in either side's bound". If you do it half way through your move it is in your bound, so it is permissable.

If you insist on any oblique movement ending lined up in combat then I would do a zig-zag ending lined up in combat. This would be part of the normal move, not the 80 p extra.

Both of these are consistent with the "must move into close combat if they would in real life" principle.

IMO Phil meant oblique group moves to be permitted to enable the group to move into combat lined up, even if the actual contact was the result of a forward move segment. I note that there is no limit to the amount of oblique or sideways movement allowed to line up in combat, which opens up some unexpected possibilities.

[andrew]

Hi Lawrence!!  Are you getting into the DBMM much since our game?  I was genuinely surprised at the resilience of the Ancient British WbF - I had expected to be carting them off the table in truckloads.....

When referring to the 'no limit on the amount of oblique or sideways movement' are you referring to page 28?  On reading the above posts it sounds like it won't be there in future versions of the rules.  This was exactly the rule I was referring to that said you cannot make any oblique /sideways movement except to line up in front edge combat.  I believe (from my previous) posts that the wording is ambiguous and to remain as is, would lead to conflicting interpretations - as has already been demonstrated.

Cheers and regards
Andrew

[LawrenceG]

Hi Lawrence!!  Are you getting into the DBMM much since our game?  I was genuinely surprised at the resilience of the Ancient British WbF - I had expected to be carting them off the table in truckloads.....

When referring to the 'no limit on the amount of oblique or sideways movement' are you referring to page 28?  On reading the above posts it sounds like it won't be there in future versions of the rules.  This was exactly the rule I was referring to that said you cannot make any oblique /sideways movement except to line up in front edge combat.  I believe (from my previous) posts that the wording is ambiguous and to remain as is, would lead to conflicting interpretations - as has already been demonstrated.

Cheers and regards
Andrew

I've played a few games of DBMM200 since our game. In our game, if I had remembered that in my bound the blades quick kill the warband and not the other way round I probably would have done you a lot more damage. 


I was referring to page 28, which apparently allows you to move a group its full distance sideways or diagonally to line up in close combat.

[andrew]

if I had remembered that in my bound the blades quick kill the warband and not the other way round I probably would have done you a lot more damage. 

Yes - I think a little more aggression with your Blades and AxS would have seen me defeated.  The AxS dish out a -2 to the WbF if you beat me in your bound, plus you would break the ties.  Starting at 3 all I would die in 11/36 combat results (30%) and you would die in 2/36 (5%).  With a single overlap, the AxS kill the WbF 47% of the time in their bound and die 3% of the time.  From memory they were there for the taking!

I was referring to page 28, which apparently allows you to move a group its full distance sideways or diagonally to line up in close combat.

I think that wording may change/disappear given the confusion it is creating.  IMO if it made a reference to the rule on page 33 then there wouldn't be an issue.

Regards
Andrew

[MikeCampbell]

They coem after 28 and so superseed anything you think you may have read there.

There's no need to be condescending about - anyone can play that game anonymously.  To quote you "where does it say that" page 33 supercedes page 28?  Have a read of page 28 and you might just read what I wrote.  If we are going to used that sort of warped logic (of after = supercedes) then how come you don't accept the image of sliding into a gap supercedes the words about making frontal combat?  I think you are making this up as you go along!!!! 

It doesn't have to, since I don't see it being a problem in the first place - I'm actually trying to explain it to you in terms you will understand - sorry for getting it wrong! 

[vexillia]

Then where does it say that the alignment in an enemy TZ has to be at the start or beginning of a move and cannot be during that move?

Does this help:

• Page 28, last paragraph clearly states that groups can only slide sideways to line up when in front edge contact.  As contact is required before any free 80p slide the timing is clear: groups slide only after making contact.
• Page 33, details the nature of the free move for groups and elements.  I can see no restrictions on when either a group or an element slides etc. 

For measuring single element moves such a timing distinction is academic given that their moves are measured from start to finish and take no account of the route taken if outside a TZ at the start of the move.

It's so typical of DBMM to place these in the reverse order. Hope this helps.

--
Martin Stephenson
Vexillia: Wargames Miniatures & Accessories
http://vexillia.ltd.uk
http://vexilliagallery.blogspot.com/
Personal web logs
http://vexillia.blogspot.com/
http://pikeandplunder.blogspot.com/

[LawrenceG]

Does this help:

• Page 28, last paragraph clearly states that groups can only slide sideways to line up when in front edge contact.  As contact is required before any free 80p slide the timing is clear: groups slide only after making contact.

Except it doesn't say "when in front edge contact".

It says sideways or oblique movement can be included in a move "to line up in front edge combat".

IMO you can include sideways or oblique movement in a group move, if the group move is "to line up in front edge combat" and such movement could be at any point in the move.

[vexillia]

Except it doesn't say "when in front edge contact".  It says sideways or oblique movement can be included in a move "to line up in front edge combat".

Quite right but it doesn't need to as "when in" is tautological.

IMO you can include sideways or oblique movement in a group move, if the group move is "to line up in front edge combat" and such movement could be at any point in the move.

It doesn't say this either. 

There are two examples in the rules on page 60 which show the move, contact, slide sequence for an element. There's another two on page 61 which show the move, contact, slide and/or pivot sequence for groups.  There's also the same sequence (move, contact, free movement) is shown on pages 54, 56 (twice) and 57 (twice).

--
Martin Stephenson
Vexillia: Wargames Miniatures & Accessories
http://vexillia.ltd.uk
http://vexilliagallery.blogspot.com/
Personal web logs
http://vexillia.blogspot.com/
http://pikeandplunder.blogspot.com/

[LawrenceG]

Except it doesn't say "when in front edge contact".  It says sideways or oblique movement can be included in a move "to line up in front edge combat".

Quite right but it doesn't need to as "when in" is tautological.

IMO you can include sideways or oblique movement in a group move, if the group move is "to line up in front edge combat" and such movement could be at any point in the move.

It doesn't say this either. 

There are two examples in the rules on page 60 which show the move, contact, slide sequence for an element. There's another two on page 61 which show the move, contact, slide and/or pivot sequence for groups.  There's also the same sequence (move, contact, free movement) is shown on pages 54, 56 (twice) and 57 (twice).

Those examples are all either a single element move, or an 80p free extra move.

IMO page 28 allows an oblique or sideways component to a normal group move (i.e. not an 80p extra free move).


Given that we are interpreting this rule differently, the text on p 28 obviously fails to express the intended meaning clearly.

[MikeCampbell]

Except it doesn't say "when in front edge contact".  It says sideways or oblique movement can be included in a move "to line up in front edge combat".

Quite right but it doesn't need to as "when in" is tautological.

IMO it's argumentative and not tautological (which I had to look up to make sure I knew what you were talking about) - it doesn't HAVE to be there at all and the alternative that groups can slide whenever required to in order to line up in front edge contact is perfectly reasonable.

I'm not interested in argumiung semantics - I dont' know them well enough - it makes more sense, is simpler, allows the game to be played and agrees with the other sections of the rules.

That's enough for me.

[vexillia]

There are two examples in the rules on page 60 which show the move, contact, slide sequence for an element. There's another two on page 61 which show the move, contact, slide and/or pivot sequence for groups.  There's also the same sequence (move, contact, free movement) is shown on pages 54, 56 (twice) and 57 (twice).

Those examples are all either a single element move, or an 80p free extra move.

[1] Examples on pages 56, 57, and 61 are group moves. 

IMO page 28 allows an oblique or sideways component to a normal group move (i.e. not an 80p extra free move).

No.  Has to be "in front edge contact" not normal group move that much is clear.

Given that we are interpreting this rule differently, the text on p 28 obviously fails to express the intended meaning clearly.

Agree.

--
Martin Stephenson
Vexillia: Wargames Miniatures & Accessories
http://vexillia.ltd.uk
http://vexilliagallery.blogspot.com/
Personal web logs
http://vexillia.blogspot.com/
http://pikeandplunder.blogspot.com/

[vexillia]

IMO it's argumentative and not tautological (which I had to look up to make sure I knew what you were talking about) - it doesn't HAVE to be there at all and the alternative that groups can slide whenever required to in order to line up in front edge contact is perfectly reasonable.;

I'm not interested in arguing semantics - I don't' know them well enough - it makes more sense, is simpler, allows the game to be played and agrees with the other sections of the rules.

That's enough for me.

Ah! The appeal to reason, simplicity and common sense Shame the rules don't provide this for us out of the box.  As Toby said:

If it remains unclear, it may have to get an entry in the Commentary, unless Phil rewrites it in the meantime.

--
Martin Stephenson
Vexillia: Wargames Miniatures & Accessories
http://vexillia.ltd.uk
http://vexilliagallery.blogspot.com/
Personal web logs
http://vexillia.blogspot.com/
http://pikeandplunder.blogspot.com/