Double overlap

LeslieMitchell · Post by **LeslieMitchell** » Sun Nov 20, 2011 11:35 am

Double overlap by LeslieIan1963, on Flickr

We had a weird situation the other week. Here how it came about

Auxiliary Unit 1 charged Auxiliary Unit A, Auxiliary Unit B Intercepted Auxiliary unit 1, and the impact was resolved.

Auxiliary Unit 1 was unable to conform, my opponent move Auxiliary unit 2 up to Auxiliary unit 1 as you can see on the picture, all well and good apart from the fact he then claimed it was forming an overlap. So we now have the situation where a base not in edge or corner contact is in overlap support to a base which is already in an overlap.

Base 1.1 is fighting Base B.1 with Base B.2 in overlap support, and now Base 2.1 is giving overlap support to Base 1.1, if Auxiliary Unit 1 had conformed then Base 2.1 should be fighting Base B.2, and therefore would not have been able to move up in the movement phase to create the overlap. The umpire agreed with my opponent that this was not in an overlap, but I'm unsure if this is right as you fight as if conformed, but you're allowed to move into combat as if not conformed, to then fight as if conformed.

So the question becomes can two bases which are fighting each other both be in overlap on the same side?

peterrjohnston · Post by **peterrjohnston** » Sun Nov 20, 2011 2:17 pm

I would have ruled aux 2 can't move into overlap. Mainly because of the section in melees on unconformed BGs - they should be counted as conformed, and BGs can only be overlapped at the end of a line of bases, ie externally, not internally.

And to make it worse

, B.2 counts as an overlap.

peterrjohnston · Post by **peterrjohnston** » Sun Nov 20, 2011 2:22 pm

PS I don't know where aux 1 started from, but they could have perhaps wheeled to avoid the intercept.

Or was another BG to the left in the picture in the way?

LeslieMitchell · Post by **LeslieMitchell** » Sun Nov 20, 2011 3:28 pm

peterrjohnston wrote:PS I don't know where aux 1 started from, but they could have perhaps wheeled to avoid the intercept.

Or was another BG to the left in the picture in the way?

there was another 3 or 4 units

and we where 4"

LeslieMitchell · Post by **LeslieMitchell** » Sun Nov 20, 2011 4:20 pm

peterrjohnston wrote:And to make it worse , B.2 counts as an overlap.

I did say that

bbotus · Post by **bbotus** » Sun Nov 20, 2011 7:43 pm

Follow-up question: Agreed that Aux 1 can't totally conform to the enemy and end in a block. But shouldn't it be shifted sideways to the right to line up with the bases of Aux A? Then on Aux B's turn it could pivot and shift left to line up with Base 1.1.

Note on the picture: It looks like Aux B intercepted by moving through the right rear corner of Aux A which wouldn't be right. Did the bases of Aux B get bumped?

LeslieMitchell · Post by **LeslieMitchell** » Sun Nov 20, 2011 9:32 pm

bbotus wrote:Follow-up question: Agreed that Aux 1 can't totally conform to the enemy and end in a block. But shouldn't it be shifted sideways to the right to line up with the bases of Aux A? Then on Aux B's turn it could pivot and shift left to line up with Base 1.1.

Note on the picture: It looks like Aux B intercepted by moving through the right rear corner of Aux A which wouldn't be right. Did the bases of Aux B get bumped?

I agree Aux B got bumped, the did pass by

, the front corner touching the rear corner of Aux A. Aux A and Aux B would conform in my turn. as I understand conforming you do not partially conform, so you stay in your UN-conformed position.

peterrjohnston · Post by **peterrjohnston** » Sun Nov 20, 2011 9:32 pm

I've always taken the first bullet point on conforming "... usually means lining up each base..." to mean all bases must conform.

By the look of it, as 1 can't in its turn, A and B will conform in their turn.

hazelbark · Post by **hazelbark** » Sun Nov 20, 2011 10:06 pm

peterrjohnston wrote:I would have ruled aux 2 can't move into overlap. Mainly because of the section in melees on unconformed BGs - they should be counted as conformed, and BGs can only be overlapped at the end of a line of bases, ie externally, not internally.

Don't have rules with me but this or the alternative the unit moves up. Both sides overlap and then in the enemy turn a lot of coonforming occurs that cleans up everything and pulls Aux 2 into melee.

bbotus · Post by **bbotus** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 1:36 am

By the look of it, as 1 can't in its turn, A and B will conform in their turn.

And how will they conform? Rotate B and move it next to A then move up the file headed by base 1.1 of Aux 1? Or would you push back Aux 1 to form a block aligned with base 1.1 and then advance A and rotate and shift B?

None of this is really covered in the rules that I can find.

bbotus · Post by **bbotus** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 1:44 am

hazelbark wrote:
peterrjohnston wrote:I would have ruled aux 2 can't move into overlap. Mainly because of the section in melees on unconformed BGs - they should be counted as conformed, and BGs can only be overlapped at the end of a line of bases, ie externally, not internally.
Don't have rules with me but this or the alternative the unit moves up. Both sides overlap and then in the enemy turn a lot of coonforming occurs that cleans up everything and pulls Aux 2 into melee.

Hmmm. Ok, a question: If B wasn't angled but intercepted straight ahead facing the same direction as A, then Aux 1 charged in ending in the same position, would you still allow Aux 2 to move up in the Manoeuvre Phase? I don't think so, clearly, it would be a frontal contact that would require Aux 2 to declare a charge to get into combat. Does angling B a little really change that fact in any way?

hazelbark · Post by **hazelbark** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 6:02 am

bbotus wrote:
By the look of it, as 1 can't in its turn, A and B will conform in their turn.
And how will they conform? Rotate B and move it next to A then move up the file headed by base 1.1 of Aux 1? Or would you push back Aux 1 to form a block aligned with base 1.1 and then advance A and rotate and shift B?

None of this is really covered in the rules that I can find.

I may be missing where you are saying this in the thread. But "A" conforms by sliding to match up to our left as we view the image. "b" swings up and slides in. That is very clear.

hazelbark · Post by **hazelbark** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 6:06 am

bbotus wrote:Hmmm. Ok, a question: If B wasn't angled but intercepted straight ahead facing the same direction as A, then Aux 1 charged in ending in the same position, would you still allow Aux 2 to move up in the Manoeuvre Phase? I don't think so, clearly, it would be a frontal contact that would require Aux 2 to declare a charge to get into combat. Does angling B a little really change that fact in any way?

Obviously a move that is frontal contact like that would be an impact not manuver. I see your point. If the bases fight where they would be as if conformed.

bbotus · Post by **bbotus** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 8:49 pm

Obviously a move that is frontal contact like that would be an impact not manuver. I see your point. If the bases fight where they would be as if conformed.

Yes, and read page 86 'Melees That Cannot Line Up'. It says to treat such melees as if they had lined up and act accordingly.

bbotus · Post by **bbotus** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 8:52 pm

I may be missing where you are saying this in the thread. But "A" conforms by sliding to match up to our left as we view the image. "b" swings up and slides in. That is very clear.

OK, and Aux 1 stays in an offset position. That works. Thanks.