Lining up question

[Tim Child]

Yes, but if the other columns are within 80p of the pikes in front of them they must line up as soon as they can i.e. before column 5-8 moves.

But then column 13-16 moves out of an enemy TZ in an illegal way.

No more illegal than if column 9-12 had moved into contact and pushed them personally.  I have no problem with this - it's just a consequence of the fact that we play element-based games with toy soldiers glued onto fixed rectangles but on a freestyle cloth and therefore we have to make some adjustments from time to time.  If we played on a fixed grid, column 13-16 would probably have started outside the TZ of the Bd.

[arvnranger]

But then column 13-16 moves out of an enemy TZ in an illegal way.

[it] Would this be deemed an outcome move (indirectly an outcome of Column 5-8's compulsory spontaneous advance) and permitted per the last bullet point on p32?

Sorry, I'm afraid I don't understand your question. 

[it] My gut feel is that to recognise the "absolute requirement that troops that would move into contact in real life must do so in the game" Column 5-8 must displace Columns 9-12 and 13-16 laterally. You point out that C13-16 would then exit the TZ of Blade D in circumstances not permitted. I was looking for justification for such a move within the rules as written (as outcome moves ignore TZ constraints) but I see now that outcome moves are defined on p28 and spontaneous advance is treated separately. The "ignore TZ restriction" permission on p33 para 1 is only for elements "at least partially in front of the moving element" which in context appears to mean directly in front, not 'ahead of, but laterally offset'.

[landmeister]

Thanks for both responses. I finally found a partial solution looking at figure 10d on page 56.  Once again, I would like to know if Phil considers "any obstructing element" means "all of them" or just "those immediately in contact". Sorry, I don't want to be too a troublemaker. 

[Valentinian Victor]

Thanks for both responses. I finally found a partial solution looking at figure 10d on page 56.  Once again, I would like to know if Phil considers "any obstructing element" means "all of them" or just "those immediately in contact". Sorry, I don't want to be too a troublemaker. 

To be honest I think that this is a bit of a non-issue. The whole group has to shift because some of them are within 80p of enemy elements and they need to line up, even if the group is made up of elements from different commands. I can see what you were trying to do, get that column in contact as quickly as possible, but lining up the group first would have sorted out the problem for you anyway.

[arvnranger]

To be honest I think that this is a bit of a non-issue. The whole group has to shift because some of them are within 80p of enemy elements and they need to line up, even if the group is made up of elements from different commands. I can see what you were trying to do, get that column in contact as quickly as possible, but lining up the group first would have sorted out the problem for you anyway.

[it] To be fair I think there are a couple of issues that require resolution:

(a) The lateral shift solution that is favoured by the current majority of forum posters violates the TZ rules (Column 13-16 vs Blade D), notwithstanding that, in this instance, the TZ rules appear to conflict with the stipulation that "troops that would move into contact in real life must do so in the game" (Column 5-8 vs Blade B).

(b) Lawrence has drawn attention (on the Yahoo DBMM List) to the fact that if the lateral displacement referred above becomes mandatory the elements in Column 13-16 would then be in a position to wrap the flank of Blade D in their next move (whereas if no lateral shift took place an element in an enemy TZ would need another 2 bound's tactical movement (and PIPS for such) to reach a similar position - 1. Directly back out of TZ; 2. Lateral movement to beyond enemy flank).

[arvnranger]

[it] Sorry - Column 5-8 vs Blade C.

[landmeister]

Great! I see I'm not the only troublemaker here  

[Valentinian Victor]

Think about the situation and how it would be resolved if all the blade elements were able to move into contact with the pike group, how would you have resolved lining up then?

The situation only becomes more complex if the forward elements of the Blade group are not within 80p of the pike elements. Under this circumstance it is likely that any umpire would rule that only column 1-4 would need to be moved when column 5-8 moves into combat as that is the least amount of obstructing elements that need to be moved in order for column 5-8 to be able to move into full front edge contact.
Mind you, it could be argued that if the blades were further than 80p from the pikes then the blades could sponno into contact with pikes, slide into contat and those that cannot slide because the blades either side are in the way would remain behind the blades that reach the pikes but not fully lined up.

[arvnranger]

<snip> ... as that is the least amount of obstructing elements that need to be moved in order for column 5-8 to be able to move into full front edge contact.

[it] There's nothing I can see in the EMTLU rules, or elsewhere, that indicates that the number of elements displaced determines the direction of the shift - it is minimum (distance) up to 80p.

Also, I have misread p33 para 1 "Moving Into Close Combat" - apologies for misdirecting the discussion. I believe C13-16 can ignore the TZ of Blade D (and C9-12 that of Blade C) when making room for C5-8.

The remaining matter regarding the "free" move to the jumping off point for a flank attack is simply an unfortunatate artefact of the lining-up rules. If PIPs were spent moving the group 9-16 directly forward into contact with the blades then C13-16 would end outside the flank of Blade D. I've yet to see on table the situation originally posited and if a player can contrive it, with the intention of saving a few PIPs, they'd be more subtle and far-thinking than I could ever hope to be.

@landmeister: Not here to make trouble, friend