Options when a flank charge isn't legal?

[RollsDice]

Hello again! Same noob, still part way through his third game.

The diagrams show a situation that occurred to help me descibe how we fudged it until I could get to the forum.



Spanish Cav hit my Hastati in the flank who drop to Disrupted but survive impact and melee with no further effect.

In my turn the Triarii want to help.

We knew a flank charge was illegal due to positioning (A) so decided that the only option was to move to an overlap position in the manoeuvre phase (B).

1. Were we right?
2. Do the Triarii have to align like (C) and if so, when? We played no.
3. The Spanish caused the Hastati no problems after the charge. Could the Hastai eventually move more bases into the fight as if they were engaged to the front? (In the game they soon were engaged to the front too, so it was never an option).
4. Can the Hastati cheekily claim rear support from the Triarii in either (B) or (C)?

As a side note, our two earlier games were Saxon/Anglo-Danish affairs and this was our first Punic Wars game. Romans are astonishingly resilient. The Hastati took the charge from the Spanish Cavalry, dropping to Disrupted. Then took a charge to the front from Spanish infantry, dropping to Fragmented, and held like this till support arrived from the Triarii and some Principes. The Hastati are now bolstered to back to Disrupted and have Disrupted both the Spanish BG's. If the rear support from the Triarii was allowed they would have been back to Steady!

[Mehrunes]

1.) Moving into an overlap position is an option. Another option is to set up a proper flank charge which will arrive one turn later.
2.) They do not align but have to be moved in a way to get in a legal overlap position. The one in B is none. You need side edge to side edge contact with your friends in that case.
3.) They can.
4.) Of course not. The Triarii BG is not directly to the Hastati BG's rear.

Romans are astonishingly resilient. The Hastati took the charge from the Spanish Cavalry, dropping to Disrupted. Then took a charge to the front from Spanish infantry, dropping to Fragmented, and held like this till support arrived from the Triarii and some Principes. The Hastati are now bolstered to back to Disrupted and have Disrupted both the Spanish BG's

I'd would say you did something wrong or your dice rolling was very one-sided.

[RollsDice]

1.) Moving into an overlap position is an option. Another option is to set up a proper flank charge which will arrive one turn later.
2.) They do not align but have to be moved in a way to get in a legal overlap position. The one in B is none. You need side edge to side edge contact with your friends in that case.

Moving into edge to edge for an overlap would take forever. Guess I should have been patient and set up the flank charge.

4.) Of course not. The Triarii BG is not directly to the Hastati BG's rear.

Do the Hastati not have a rear when engaged to the flank? I see two Elite bases both partially behind the Hastati, the Hastati being partly in front of the line extending the Triarii's front edge...

I'd would say you did something wrong or your dice rolling was very one-sided.

Dice. My mate has had the three worst games in a row! Combat resolution is one of the things we do understand.

We got the overlap thing wrong then. Bother. Thanks anyway.

[hammy]

Moving into edge to edge for an overlap would take forever. Guess I should have been patient and set up the flank charge.

Remember that a BG can slide upto half a base to reach an overlap position. Assuming your diagram has the correct spacing then there would not be an issue for the triarii to get to overlap.

Do the Hastati not have a rear when engaged to the flank? I see two Elite bases both partially behind the Hastati, the Hastati being partly in front of the line extending the Triarii's front edge...

BGs facing in two directions can't have rear support

Dice. My mate has had the three worst games in a row! Combat resolution is one of the things we do understand.

It does sound as if your dice were really rather dire

A BG of 4 Hastati would if fragmented only get 2 dice which would be on + against the infantry and even or - against the cavalry. The Spanish would be getting probably 10 dice so for the Romans to hold is quite impressive.

[Mehrunes]

There was a discussion about where an offset BG has its rear. AFAIR it was said that they can count both their rear edges as rear edge for rear support. But I think that would then include only the bases whose rear edge was count!?

If that is the case, in your example the rear of the right file would point to the bottom and that of the turned file would be to the right. The triarii are behind neither of them. That would be my interpretation.

Nevertheless the triarii in picture C will never give rear support because they are in close combat.

@hammy

BGs facing in two directions can't have rear support

That seems not to be true. It is often stated here in the forums but the official ruling seems to be that:
viewtopic.php?p=57222#57222

[RollsDice]

Remember that a BG can slide upto half a base to reach an overlap position. Assuming your diagram has the correct spacing then there would not be an issue for the triarii to get to overlap.

So I could go straight from A to C?

The diagram is pretty close to the situation but I'm struggling to imagine pulling that off, even with the shift.

If I shift to the right until my front left corner lines up with the hastati's front edge, then wheel, I line up perfectly but there's a gap.

If I wheel first, then shift, there's no gap but the triarii are further forward than the hastati.

[ShrubMiK]

>If I wheel first, then shift, there's no gap but the triarii are further forward than the hastati.

So that's side edge to side edge with enemy in combat with your friends to their front...which counts as an overlap.

Possibly a part wheel. then the shift, then a further wheel would enable you to get corner to corner...if you are really after neatness as far as I am aware there is no restriction on the shift being at start or end of move only.

[philqw78]

BGs facing in two directions can't have rear support

That seems not to be true. It is often stated here in the forums but the official ruling seems to be that:
viewtopic.php?p=57222#57222

It would be nice to see it in the FAQ

[grahambriggs]

BGs facing in two directions can't have rear support

That seems not to be true. It is often stated here in the forums but the official ruling seems to be that:
viewtopic.php?p=57222#57222

It would be nice to see it in the FAQ

That was Terry's unofficial view in 2008. It's not an official clarification and indeed i believe Terry plays it differently.

However, I don't believe there is any support in the rules for Hammy's statement. It's clear that a BG facing in 2 directions does have a rear (if you're positioned right you can charge them in the rear). The problem is that there is no clarity of where the rear support needs to be.

I normally play it as the 'original' rear (i.e. before the bases turned to flank) but there are a nuber of ways it could be defined.

[Mehrunes]

It's the most official statement we have, isn't it?

[titanu]

In my turn the Triarii want to help.

We knew a flank charge was illegal due to positioning (A) so decided that the only option was to move to an overlap position in the manoeuvre phase (B).
2. Do the Triarii have to align like (C) and if so, when? We played no.

1) I think that C is wrong. The Triari should wheel to have their side edge paralled to the cavalry and then move up to 1/2 base sideways. Thus their front edge will not be the same line as that of their friends.

[grahambriggs]

It's the most official statement we have, isn't it?

No. It's not at all official. It isn't official until the three authors agree and publish it in the FAQ. It's daft to accept a musing from one author, who may not have the rules with him, on one thread on one forum as holy writ.

In a recent game with Terry he charged some of LH at some of my LF. The latter evaded, revealing the flank of my MF. He stopped the LH 1MU short, until such time as i showed him the rule that said he had to charge in. Perhaps I should have accepted that his word as an author is enough to change the rules?

[Ghaznavid]

>If I wheel first, then shift, there's no gap but the triarii are further forward than the hastati.

So that's side edge to side edge with enemy in combat with your friends to their front...which counts as an overlap.

Possibly a part wheel. then the shift, then a further wheel would enable you to get corner to corner...if you are really after neatness as far as I am aware there is no restriction on the shift being at start or end of move only.

Unless one assumes that the general rules on shifts apply to this shift as well, in which case a double wheel would be forbidden.

[Ghaznavid]

It's the most official statement we have, isn't it?

No. It's not at all official. It isn't official until the three authors agree and publish it in the FAQ. It's daft to accept a musing from one author, who may not have the rules with him, on one thread on one forum as holy writ.

In a recent game with Terry he charged some of LH at some of my LF. The latter evaded, revealing the flank of my MF. He stopped the LH 1MU short, until such time as i showed him the rule that said he had to charge in. Perhaps I should have accepted that his word as an author is enough to change the rules?

That authors can make errors with the rules is only natural. Still until Simon and or Richard disagree or something absolute official comes out (i.e. it's put into the FAQ or Errata) this is the best we have. As an umpire I would go with this statement from Terry over hearsay from this or that more or less prolific posters.