When are you completely behind field fortifications?

richafricanus · Post by **richafricanus** » Sun Aug 01, 2010 5:49 am

What does completely behind field fortifications mean for deployment purposes? If I am anticipating a flank attack can I do the following:

XYYYYYY
ZZZZZZ

X is my single FF, Y is a unit of 6 bases and Z is my opponent's side of the table. Does Y count as being completely behind FF?

david53 · Post by **david53** » Sun Aug 01, 2010 7:17 am

richafricanus wrote:What does completely behind field fortifications mean for deployment purposes? If I am anticipating a flank attack can I do the following:

XYYYYYY
ZZZZZZ

X is my single FF, Y is a unit of 6 bases and Z is my opponent's side of the table. Does Y count as being completely behind FF?

You only count that if you are totally behind FF in your diagram your parralle to it?

babyshark · Post by **babyshark** » Sun Aug 01, 2010 12:15 pm

Short answer: your diagram does not contain enough information.

Long answer: if X and Y are both pointing toward the same side edge of the table, as opposed the opponent's base edge, then I think Y is behind X. If X is pointing to the side, and Y are pointing to the opponent's base edge then no.

Marc

expendablecinc · Post by **expendablecinc** » Sun Aug 01, 2010 12:35 pm

babyshark wrote:Short answer: your diagram does not contain enough information.

Long answer: if X and Y are both pointing toward the same side edge of the table, as opposed the opponent's base edge, then I think Y is behind X. If X is pointing to the side, and Y are pointing to the opponent's base edge then no.

Marc

Its not explicit in the rules but if any other interpretation leads to 1FD facing to the side enabling half an army to line up at 15 inches in

anthony

deadtorius · Post by **deadtorius** » Sun Aug 01, 2010 3:31 pm

It is rather vague on the term completely behind, but if you look at page 121 it talks about defending field fortifications, ans there you have to be in contact with the rear of the field fortification to get the benefit of it. It could be assumed that this would also apply to being completely behind, but would make it impossible to deploy as a 2 deep line then so perhaps you are correct that a single field fortification could allow you to deploy a BG in column behind it as they would all be completely behind the field fortification when deployed.
Perhaps we need an author to wade in on this one.

richafricanus · Post by **richafricanus** » Sun Aug 01, 2010 3:56 pm

Sorry if my diagram was unclear - let me clarify

X is a single element wide FF facing the side of the table
Y is a BG 6 elements strong in column directly behind the FF facing in the same direction
Z is my opponent's base edge

XYYYYYY

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

So yes, as someone suggested, if this qualifies as completely behind FF then I could theoretically deploy a long column in the central sector 15 inches forward facing sideways. Very cheesy but nice for some

deadtorius · Post by **deadtorius** » Sun Aug 01, 2010 6:09 pm

I believe the drawing is sideways so his opponents army is off to the left of the screen. You want to deploy in column behind a single field fortification and the rules are very very vague on such things. Perhaps because so few armies get any FF's in their lists it was overlooked. I hope in FOG R they have been clearer on such things as some armies relied on FF's.

gozerius · Post by **gozerius** » Tue Aug 03, 2010 1:32 am

This is why I stopped bothering with this forum.
Anyone who feels bold enough to claim they are "behind" fortifications when their flank is exposed to the enemy's deployment area isn't worth arguing with. Just pick up your toys and go home.

To me, if the fortification is facing the enemy deployment area, and and the shortest line between any point on your troops and the nearest point of the enemy deployment area passes through the fortification, you are "completely behind" fortifications for deployment purposes. Any thing else is just silliness. Even if you qualify as "defending fortifications".

deadtorius · Post by **deadtorius** » Tue Aug 03, 2010 1:42 am

Question is can he deploy more than one base of troops behind a single field fortification, not if he counts as being behind it. The rules don't specify how many troops can deploy behind a single field fortification, which would allow him to deploy his troops further forward than non lights can otherwise deploy. Do that on a flank your flank troops have a head start on getting up close to the enemy.

petedalby · Post by **petedalby** » Fri Aug 06, 2010 2:52 pm

So yes, as someone suggested, if this qualifies as completely behind FF then I could theoretically deploy a long column in the central sector 15 inches forward facing sideways. Very cheesy but nice for some

You could do this but you are unlikely to win many friends. Personally I would advise against such blatant cheese.

I am delighted to say that I've never seen anyone do this and hope that I never do.

expendablecinc · Post by **expendablecinc** » Tue Aug 10, 2010 11:23 pm

petedalby wrote:
So yes, as someone suggested, if this qualifies as completely behind FF then I could theoretically deploy a long column in the central sector 15 inches forward facing sideways. Very cheesy but nice for some
You could do this but you are unlikely to win many friends. Personally I would advise against such blatant cheese.

I am delighted to say that I've never seen anyone do this and hope that I never do.

The problem with using rules to enforce it is that it shoudl be viable to set up FF to protect your flank. Assuming that its only one BG in column behind the FF I dont think it really provides a great deal more benefit that if they were in column behind the FF facing the enemy base edge. ie they still have to turn and move and so are likely to be drilled toget the benefit - in which case they could just as easily expand and move if starting by facing forwards.

I think a simply fix is for FF to be deployed at least in pairs and that BG set up using them (ie forward of 15 inches) must be defending FF (not just behind them). I think thats the convention anyway, just not explicit in rules.

Ive never seen the side edge facing single FF for the sole purpose of advance deployment but a single facing forwards for the same reason plenty of times. ie every time people have 3 points wasted in the list and where FF are available.

deadtorius · Post by **deadtorius** » Tue Aug 10, 2010 11:39 pm

Blathegut used his Roman FF's to tie into his camp for a few games. He had poor troops manning them and tried out artillery too. 2 games later and I have never seen either them on the TT since.
The OP is trying a super cheese move to get an advanced deployment so he can get a jump on his opponents flank without the risk of a flank march not showing up. Not sure that is in the spirit of the rules though.

expendablecinc · Post by **expendablecinc** » Wed Aug 11, 2010 2:50 am

deadtorius wrote:Blathegut used his Roman FF's to tie into his camp for a few games. He had poor troops manning them and tried out artillery too. 2 games later and I have never seen either them on the TT since.
The OP is trying a super cheese move to get an advanced deployment so he can get a jump on his opponents flank without the risk of a flank march not showing up. Not sure that is in the spirit of the rules though.

OP: Bear in mind that you cant deploy FF at 15 inches in the flank sectors. Only in the central sector.

In the flanks FF can only be 10 inches in at a maximum.

deadtorius · Post by **deadtorius** » Wed Aug 11, 2010 10:50 pm

That I never checke up on, my armies don't get them so I never really looked at the FF rules that closely. Good thing you pointed that out, guess that fouls another super cheese attempt