Turning 90 query

[sgtsteiner]

Hi

I am bit confused by the wording of this section specifically the use of word minimum.

When a BG turns 90deg it forms with a new frontage that has the minimum base widths that is at least equal to original depth.

So a 2 rank deep BG of Cav turns 90 ending up 2 wide and 2 deep BUT is this the minimum allowed (as per wording) or is actually the maximum allowed ie is the turn restricted to 2 bases wide of could the Cav turn 90 from 2 wide x 2 deep to 4 wide ?

Or if 2 wide x 2 deep BG of HF turns 90 does it end up in a 1 base wide column or can it end up 2 wide x 2 deep ir indeed 4 wide ?

This came up in a game today and we decided after debating the rule section that it was both a min and a max

Cheers

[shall]

When a BG turns 90deg it forms with a new frontage that has the minimum (number of) base widths that is at least equal to original depth

Does adding the bit in brackets sort it for you. It is the minimum number of base widths that will eqaul or more the original depth.

Si

[sgtsteiner]

Hi Simon

When I read minimum in this rule I understand it as 'the smallest' number of bases that comprise the frontage of the new facing therefore leading me to believe it can be greater/wider ?

Does the rule actually mean that the new frontage after turning is determined by at least equalling the original depth and that this 'minimum' new frontage is ALSO the maximum frontage that can be achieved ?

Quite hard to put into words what I mean here !

Cheers
Gary

[Ironhand]

OK, let me see if I have this right. A BG of cavalry two wide and two deep is 80MM wide and 60MM deep (for 15MM figures). So if it turns 90 degrees it would still be in a two wide and two deep formation since two base widths (80MM) is the minimum to equal or exceed the original depth (60MM).

[sgtsteiner]

Hi

Yes that is correct

So your BG cannot turn 90 and end up in a 1 base wide column as it must have 2 base (80mm) minimum width as it was 60mm deep originally

My query is if this minimum is also a maximum in that; is your BG 'restricted' to this 2 wide minimum or can it be wider (4 wide or 3 wide with 1 in rear rank) after the turn.

I suspect the min is also a max (going by the diagrams) but just seeking clarification

Cheers

[hammy]

The new width is a fixed value, there is no choice as to how wide a turned BG is.

When a BG turns all that is happening is each individual in the group is turning in place so the shape remains the same. The limitations of bases sizes mean that for example an 80 by 60 BG effectively becomes a 60 by 80 one.

[matt0341]

If the original depth is less than or equal to 40mm then the new turned frontage is one base width, (40mm).

If the depth is greater than 40mm up to 80mm then the new turned frontage is two base widths (80mm).

If the depth is greater than 80mm up to 120mm then the new frontage is three base widths (120mm).

A roman BG of 8 HF in two ranks has a depth of 30mm. Turned 90 degrees you get a 1 base wide column that is 8 deep (120mm). If same BG turns 90 degrees again You get a frontage of three bases in two ranks and a third rank with two bases.

Does this sound Right?

[terrys]

A roman BG of 8 HF in two ranks has a depth of 30mm. Turned 90 degrees you get a 1 base wide column that is 8 deep (120mm). If same BG turns 90 degrees again You get a frontage of three bases in two ranks and a third rank with two bases.

Does this sound Right?

Yes. One of the penalties of a 'dithering' commander

[lawrenceg]

Hi

I am bit confused by the wording of this section specifically the use of word minimum.

When a BG turns 90deg it forms with a new frontage that has the minimum base widths that is at least equal to original depth.

The English above tells you precisely what the new frontage is. It is the minimum base widths at least equal to the original depth.

Mathematically it is :

New frontage = minimum number of whole base widths such that frontage (in mm) >= original depth (in mm).

An alternative wording is:

"When a BG turns 90deg its new frontage must be as small as possible, subject to the constraint that it cannot be less than the original depth."


The confusion comes from thinking it says "The minimum new frontage is ...." It does not say that.

[shall]

Indeed - so there is no choice in it.

Si

[sgtsteiner]

Hi


>An alternative wording is:

>"When a BG turns 90deg its new frontage must be as small as possible, subject to the constraint that it cannot be >less than the original depth."

Thats clears it up.

Cheers

[expendablecinc]

Does this mean that if a player deployes thier pike one base deep in a 12 base wide line they can turn 90 degrees on either end and accordion thier line up behind the ne wfront base? Is this a problem others have encountered?

It was a problem in DBMM but even more so as there is no limit to the phalanx size so can be as wide as the table- but it still looks a bit odd under the 12 base max for FoG.

With two 90 degree turns a single file of 12 pike can shuffle up to 8 base widths either to their left or right and end up 4 deep to get stuck into whatever is there.

Anthony

[carlos]

Does this mean that if a player deployes thier pike one base deep in a 12 base wide line they can turn 90 degrees on either end and accordion thier line up behind the ne wfront base? Is this a problem others have encountered?

It was a problem in DBMM but even more so as there is no limit to the phalanx size so can be as wide as the table- but it still looks a bit odd under the 12 base max for FoG.

With two 90 degree turns a single file of 12 pike can shuffle up to 8 base widths either to their left or right and end up 4 deep to get stuck into whatever is there.

Anthony

No. You will accordion up with the first turn, and then accordion back out with the second turn not gaining or losing any ground. Remember you pivot in the front corner, so it doesn't really work.

[hammy]

Actually if you deploy 12 pike in single rank then turn 90 you will only be 180mm deep so will form up 5 bases wide when you turn back. I have not seen anyone do it yet and if someone does they will be chastised but as far as the rules go it is possible.

It would take four contractions to acheive the same effect...

Hmm