Flank contact

[landmeister]

A new wording has been included in 2.0 and i would like some confirmation I get it right.   If my element has to contact an enemy flank but it's obstructed by terrain, enemy, etc...

...in which case the full flank edge or full front edge must be in contact.

This mean that my front element has to contact the full ENEMY flank or that MY full fron must be in contact to its flank. Right? Other than contacting long side edge WWg elements, when this second situation can be found?

Thank you in advance.

[LAP1964]

Any element with a 40mm or deeper base for 15mm figures.ie DBEs of Cv,Bw(X) & Bw(S),(O),Els,chariots,Art,Exp,SBW.
LES
  

[landmeister]

Sorry, what is SBW? 

[LAP1964]

, what is SBW? 

Single Base Wedge.
LES

[landmeister]

Ok. Thank you. 

[Valentinian Victor]

A new wording has been included in 2.0 and i would like some confirmation I get it right.   If my element has to contact an enemy flank but it's obstructed by terrain, enemy, etc...

...in which case the full flank edge or full front edge must be in contact.

This mean that my front element has to contact the full ENEMY flank or that MY full fron must be in contact to its flank. Right? Other than contacting long side edge WWg elements, when this second situation can be found?

Thank you in advance.

You are indeed correct, you have to cover the flank with your front edge, which may well mean some of the enemy flank is left uncovered if it is over 80p long. This is still the query over if you hit an enemy flank edge but only partially cover it with your elements front edge whether you have to fully line up with the flank edge if another elements TZ would prevent this.

[landmeister]

This is still the query over if you hit an enemy flank edge but only partially cover it with your elements front edge whether you have to fully line up with the flank edge if another elements TZ would prevent this.

I know the answer of this one!  You cannot, as is specified on page 55, figure 9g. I can give some answers from time to time, not just making annoying questions 

[landmeister]

BTW, I found an apparent contradition about overlapping WWg. According to page 35, overlapping exceptions, WWg cannot be overlapped. A few paragraphs later is said that when a WWg with a longer base edge counting as front edge is contacted by a 2nd element, it counts as overlapped. Is there any "hidden" rule behind this?

Thank you in advance.

[LAP1964]

Maybe the first one applies to the front edge (40mm wide)only?
LES

[landmeister]

This is what I thought first, but I guess there is "something more" behind.  I'm thinking about the clarification Lorenzo made about contiguous elements not forming a group and stopping marches. If Phil used the word "contiguous" and not the expression "belonging to the same group" was for some reason. Now I know why. This is why I would like to know why this apparent contradiction is trying to tell us.  :'(

[Orcoteuthis]

BTW, I found an apparent contradition about overlapping WWg. According to page 35, overlapping exceptions, WWg cannot be overlapped. A few paragraphs later is said that when a WWg with a longer base edge counting as front edge is contacted by a 2nd element, it counts as overlapped. Is there any "hidden" rule behind this?

Are you refering to this bit?

If a War Wagons, Artillery, Baggage (S) or Boats elemet with a longer base edge currently acting as its front edge is contacted on that edge by 2 enemy elements, it fights each in turn that bound. If only half the edge is currently in contact, the attacker is overlapped.

If so, it's about an element fighting a WWg, not the WWg itself, counting as overlapped.

If not, please indicate more precisely which paragraph you're talking about - I can't find any saying what you say it says.

[landmeister]

Well, ehem...I'm afraid I was wrong  You're right. I misunderstood who counted as overlapped. Please accept my apoligizes. I'm very sorry. Certainly I must improve my English  .

Thank you very much.