Moving a commander in a BG that does not move

hammy · Post by **hammy** » Tue Jan 05, 2010 9:30 am

In a game last night my opponent moved a commander to a FRG BG in the JAP and then tried to make a move with the BG but failed his CMT so the BG didn't move. He then wanted to move the commander to another place in the BG. I argued that as the commander had been with the BG for the CMT that he could only move with the BG and that as there was no need to place him in a different possition to avoid him obstructing other BGs that the commander could not move.

rogerg · Post by **rogerg** » Tue Jan 05, 2010 9:38 am

I would suggest that you were correct. The rules on commanders are being played quite loosely because they rarely make a difference. It would be nice if people were more aware of the commander movement rules. It always seems a bit picky when one has to point them out, but they are there.

hammy · Post by **hammy** » Tue Jan 05, 2010 10:14 am

To be honest quite a lot of players play fast and loose with a number of the movement rules. When you play to the letter of the rules yourself it can be a big dissadvantage to let your opponent turn and then double wheel or turn and slide for example.

SirGarnet · Post by **SirGarnet** » Tue Jan 05, 2010 11:29 am

I can see his point.

Page 50 says "If he moves with the battle group, he must remain in exactly the same position relative to it, unless the formation changes." but page 43 says only that if the battle group takes a CMT when he is with it than he must "remain with the same battle group." The Fragmented BG did not move, so he did not move with it. Wouldn't moving from one part of the BG to another still mean he remains with the same battle group?

dave_r · Post by **dave_r** » Tue Jan 05, 2010 12:23 pm

How is moving one base from one side of a BG to the other side a legal move that a BG can make? He needs to make a move with the BG - so if the BG can't move (and it couldn't because it failed the CMT) then what move can he make WITH the BG?

hammy · Post by **hammy** » Tue Jan 05, 2010 12:45 pm

Consider a 12 base BG of say LF in a single rank. Put a commander at one end of it. If you don't move the BG can the commander repossition himself right at the other end of the line? Saying that if he is with a BG and the BG doesn't move then he can freely repossition would allow a commander to move 52cm through any type of terrain!!

philqw78 · Post by **philqw78** » Tue Jan 05, 2010 1:00 pm

hammy wrote:Consider a 12 base BG of say LF in a single rank. Put a commander at one end of it. If you don't move the BG can the commander repossition himself right at the other end of the line? Saying that if he is with a BG and the BG doesn't move then he can freely repossition would allow a commander to move 52cm through any type of terrain!!

Well a BG of cavalry can

hammy · Post by **hammy** » Tue Jan 05, 2010 1:01 pm

philqw78 wrote:
hammy wrote:Consider a 12 base BG of say LF in a single rank. Put a commander at one end of it. If you don't move the BG can the commander repossition himself right at the other end of the line? Saying that if he is with a BG and the BG doesn't move then he can freely repossition would allow a commander to move 52cm through any type of terrain!!
Well a BG of cavalry can

philqw78 · Post by **philqw78** » Tue Jan 05, 2010 1:04 pm

And since if said BG of LF was in melee and the general was killed the area testing around it would be 17cm by 67cm he seems to be omnipresent in said BG.

hammy · Post by **hammy** » Tue Jan 05, 2010 1:33 pm

philqw78 wrote:And since if said BG of LF was in melee and the general was killed the area testing around it would be 17cm by 67cm he seems to be omnipresent in said BG.

True...

BTW it could be any 12 base BG, it doesn't have to be LF and come to think of it there aren't many 12 base BGs of LF in the lists

hazelbark · Post by **hazelbark** » Tue Jan 05, 2010 4:42 pm

In hindsight and for FOGR perhaps commanders attached to a BG should be considered Omnipresent withinit for command radius purposes. He already is for commander death purposes.

Cleans up a needless bit of detail keeping that isn't needed.

madaxeman · Post by **madaxeman** » Tue Jan 05, 2010 5:15 pm

Does it set up too much cheese with commanders attached to 1-deep skirmish units sitting behind/in front of a BL ?

babyshark · Post by **babyshark** » Tue Jan 05, 2010 6:17 pm

madaxeman wrote:Does it set up too much cheese with commanders attached to 1-deep skirmish units sitting behind/in front of a BL ?

Answer: yes.

Marc

petedalby · Post by **petedalby** » Tue Jan 05, 2010 6:29 pm

FWIW I think you did it right Hammy.

philqw78 · Post by **philqw78** » Tue Jan 05, 2010 7:51 pm

petedalby wrote:FWIW I think you did it right Hammy.

Pete, this is Hammy you are agreeing with

. I didn't think that was allowed. He's sometimes an umpire you know?

Also Pete are you coming to MAWS 40th on 19 March

SirGarnet · Post by **SirGarnet** » Tue Jan 05, 2010 7:56 pm

The BG is stationary. The commander post-CMT must remain with it. The choice of "remain" does not appear to preclude legal movement from one attached position to another as long as he remains with the BG. It is not an unreasonable reading.

I think it is cleaner and saves time if being present for the CMT means the commander can't change position attached to the BG. It could have been written that way.

If the BG moves post-CMT, the rules are clear he remains in exactly the same relative position during the move.

Omnipresence and teleportation would be for FOG Fantasy adaptations.

petedalby · Post by **petedalby** » Tue Jan 05, 2010 8:37 pm

Pete, this is Hammy you are agreeing with . I didn't think that was allowed. He's sometimes an umpire you know?

I know - but it is a new year!

Also Pete are you coming to MAWS 40th on 19 March

Sadly not - I'm on very strict rations so have to eke out my away days carefully - and it is a bit far for those of us on the south coast.

Hope it goes well though.

philqw78 · Post by **philqw78** » Tue Jan 05, 2010 8:47 pm

petedalby wrote:Sadly not ...................and it is a bit far for those of us on the south coast.

Hope it goes well though.

I could get there form your house in 30 minutes. Unless Bognor has moved

ShrubMiK · Post by **ShrubMiK** » Tue Jan 05, 2010 10:24 pm

My interpretation has been same as MikeK.

Ghaznavid · Post by **Ghaznavid** » Wed Jan 06, 2010 7:52 am

MikeK wrote:The BG is stationary. The commander post-CMT must remain with it. The choice of "remain" does not appear to preclude legal movement from one attached position to another as long as he remains with the BG. It is not an unreasonable reading.

I think it is cleaner and saves time if being present for the CMT means the commander can't change position attached to the BG. It could have been written that way.

If the BG moves post-CMT, the rules are clear he remains in exactly the same relative position during the move.

I agree this seems to be the most logical way to read it.