Turning 90 degrees

[dvorkin]

I have discovered during my last game that according to the rule,a column of 4 bases when turns 90 degrees are on 2 lines, 3 on the first row and one on the second. And if we try to turn 90 degrees the next round to find again the initial column it's impossible.

question: is it logic?

Normaly turning 90 degrees twice would be equal to turning 180 degrees?

Don't you think that a column of cavalry loose a lot of mobility?

[domblas]

turning 90 ° looks much more difficult than doing a 180 °. pivot on ourself is easy. moving individually so that a whole BG makes 90° looks much more difficult as it implies that each soldier have the BG formation in its mind. So it looks logic to me.

[dvorkin]

Apparently you have never been in the army, believe me, a quarter turn is easier than a half turn even for a battalion

[Seldon]

Although part of this issue arises I believe from the basic geometry problem of the bases, it is convenient to remember that the counter march in fact was not a simple 180, and maybe that could be used to explain the difference between two 90 degree turns and 180.
This being becuase these changes were not just pivoting but reacommodating the location of the file and rank officers which would be an easier task in a countermarch where all the files reverse ( the first guy going all the way to the back and still being the first guy after the change ) than in a 90 degree turn.
In fact some rules don't allow units to figth after doing 90 degs and 180 degs ( yes after executing counter march ).
In this sense 90 and 180 turns for ancient battle units where very different from maneuveres executed by later military drilled formations

All in all I think this can be as a minor glitch that is not so critical and can easily be rationalized as added reorganization required after two 90 deg turns, since two 90 wouldn't match a 180 if you assume the 180 to be a counter march.

my two cents
Francisco

[dvorkin]

Ok I can understand your point of view but anyway it's strange to me that a column of chariot can move better than cavalry:

A column of chariot can turn 90 degrees and be in line and can evade in case of charge

don't try to explain me that it's easiest to light chariots to manoeuver than horses

[Seldon]

yes, that is a good point. Unfortunateley unless dealing with individual bases it is not easy to solve.

The alternatives are to live with it accepting it as a minor glitch or house rule turns. Houseruling turns should not be very difficult, although in many groups people tend to avoid houserules since it means opening Pandora's box

But I agree with you that the geometry of the bases gives the chariots the advantage that they can turn from column to line, whereas cavalry would turn to a formation with a second rank

Personally I can live with this since as I said before all arguments aside it is simply an artifact of having "bases" of troops as opposed to being able to turn individual models.

Then again if you had individual models a column of chariots would still turn 90 to a line while cavalry, unless in single file, would also turn to a couple of ranks. What we don't have with this rules is single line because minis are in bases and that is the reason why chariots in the case you point out are a bit more flexible....

not the end of the world though...

cheers
Francisco

[dvorkin]

nobody expect that life is perfect

Exceptions prove the rule, and destroy the battle plan

[willb]

Apparently you have never been in the army, believe me, a quarter turn is easier than a half turn even for a battalion

that would be a left or right face turn in place. ancient formations need to follow file leaders and just facing left or right would cause serious problems in combat. an about face would actually be easier for ancient formations as they can counter-march to put the file leaders at the front. imagine turning your battalion so that the front rank remains as the front rank when facing to the left or right.

[domblas]

true i'v never been in the army

[dvorkin]

nobody is perfect