definition of between

This forum is for any questions about the rules. Post here is you need feedback from the design team.

Moderators: philqw78, terrys, hammy, Slitherine Core, Field of Glory Moderators, Field of Glory Design

Post Reply
deadtorius
Field Marshal - Me 410A
Field Marshal - Me 410A
Posts: 5290
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 12:41 am

definition of between

Post by deadtorius »

Had a situation arise today that made us both wonder involving rear support.

As it happened the Romans had a unit of spears providing rear support for 2 4 pak battle groups of legionaries. 1 of the legions auto broke and I got to pursue into the spears, the adjacent legion no longer gets rear support since the rear support is now engaged in melee, however if my pursuit had stopped short of the spears and my front base was behind the rear line of the adjacent legion does that count as being between the rear supporters and the unit wanting to claim it?
Basically the spears were 1/2 behind each legion to provide support for both legions, does my suddenly blocking 1/2 of that spear units front block the rear support?

Hope that was clear enough
TERRYFROMSPOKANE
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Posts: 231
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 2:44 pm

Post by TERRYFROMSPOKANE »

Page 135: "There are no enemy troops even partly between the BG claiming rear support and the bases giving rear support."

Note the text says "bases" and not "battle group" giving rear support. Therefore I think the spear bases could still supply rear support because there are no enemy troops between them and the supported legionary BG.

Terry G.
Blathergut
Field Marshal - Elefant
Field Marshal - Elefant
Posts: 5882
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 1:44 am
Location: Southern Ontario, Canada

Post by Blathergut »

In essence, directly forward of the lefthand half of the spear BG base (it was a 2 base BG of triarii in two ranks), was the Romans claiming rear support, with no part of enemy base between. The righthand half of the spear base had been hit by the pikes. No conforming had happened yet.


So...Romans can claim rear support from the visible half of the triarii base?
kevinj
Major-General - Tiger I
Major-General - Tiger I
Posts: 2379
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 11:21 am
Location: Derbyshire, UK

Post by kevinj »

I would say no. In this case the Base and BG are the same, as it is only one base wide. As the enemy are between a part of that base and the BG that requires support, they must therefore be "partly between".
grahambriggs
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Posts: 3081
Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 9:48 am

Post by grahambriggs »

I would say the enemy are partly between. Draw a line from the each front corner of the Triarii base to the correspending corners of the Hastati base. Sounds like it crosses the enemy, so they're partly inbetween.
hammy
Field of Glory Team
Field of Glory Team
Posts: 5440
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 2:11 pm
Location: Stockport
Contact:

Post by hammy »

The counter argument is that the enemy troops are not between the part of the Triarii base that is providing support and the Hastati BG.

Code: Select all

HHHH
    EEEE
   TT
I suspect however that a litteral interpretation of the words would say that BG E is partly between the bases providing support and the BG being supported and would probably rule that way if called on as an umpire.

As a 'real world' justification you could say that the Triarii are now a touch distracted by the pursuing enemy BG and that the Hastatii are rather more nervous than they were now the enemy are past their flank.
grahambriggs
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Posts: 3081
Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 9:48 am

Post by grahambriggs »

hammy wrote:The counter argument is that the enemy troops are not between the part of the Triarii base that is providing support and the Hastati BG.

Code: Select all

HHHH
    EEEE
   TT
I suspect however that a litteral interpretation of the words would say that BG E is partly between the bases providing support and the BG being supported and would probably rule that way if called on as an umpire.

As a 'real world' justification you could say that the Triarii are now a touch distracted by the pursuing enemy BG and that the Hastatii are rather more nervous than they were now the enemy are past their flank.
I don't think the counter argument works Hammy because it says "even partly" between. Somethin "partly between" will of course have bits of it's base that are not between and bits that are by definition.

The 'real world' explanation works for me. "we're on our own lads, the Triarii will never fight through that lot in time"
TERRYFROMSPOKANE
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Posts: 231
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 2:44 pm

Post by TERRYFROMSPOKANE »

I didn't realize the "rear support" BG was in a 1 base wide column. If half the front of this column is covered by the pursuers (who didn't make contact) I agree there is enemy "even partly between the BG claiming rear support and the bases giving rear support.", so no rear support, IMO.

Terry G.
Blathergut
Field Marshal - Elefant
Field Marshal - Elefant
Posts: 5882
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 1:44 am
Location: Southern Ontario, Canada

Post by Blathergut »

Makes sense...was just something that came up and ?? went up over heads for a moment. :)
deadtorius
Field Marshal - Me 410A
Field Marshal - Me 410A
Posts: 5290
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 12:41 am

Post by deadtorius »

:D does a victory dance, that was what I had said if I am partly between them I did not think the rear support would count. Might have lost that game, barely, but I get to claim a rule victory (we gotta take them where we can get them)
Blathergut
Field Marshal - Elefant
Field Marshal - Elefant
Posts: 5882
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 1:44 am
Location: Southern Ontario, Canada

Post by Blathergut »

*Enjoys another elephant burger* :P
Post Reply

Return to “Rules Questions”